Page 140 of 184 FirstFirst ... 4090130138139140141142150 ... LastLast
Results 1,391 to 1,400 of 1834

Thread: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

  1. #1391
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Martel View Post

    And why if it comes to a conflict, I would support a marriage amendment defining exactly what is it and then...the issue is closed. However, for today, I'll have to consistently agree with Critical Thought that this should be a state by state issue decided upon by either referendum or some legislative endeavor, either way, We the People define the institution, not a court or exec.
    So say a State wanted to impose anti miscegnation laws?

  2. #1392
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Martel View Post
    Granted.



    What utter nonsense. Should I choose to marry another man....or my cousin....I don't expect that to be recognized. And I don't consider it "like any other contract, it's obviously NOT like any other contract.
    It most certainly is like any other contract. You have obligations and penalties for not meeting those obligations if you choose not to honor your contract.

    I happen to be married now. Should any state approve polygamy and I take another wife.....I wouldn't expect any other state to recognize. What say you allow me to take my own policy positions and stop guessing, you're not even close.
    I find it laughable that if you traveled to your neighboring state and they refused to honor your marriage now that you wouldn't take exception to it. What say you actually speak to what I said rather than some irrelevant bull**** about polygamy that was never even mentioned, hmm?

    And why if it comes to a conflict, I would support a marriage amendment defining exactly what is it and then...the issue is closed. However, for today, I'll have to consistently agree with Critical Thought that this should be a state by state issue decided upon by either referendum or some legislative endeavor, either way, We the People define the institution, not a court or exec.
    No, We the People, do not define the institution when it comes to State sanctioned privilege and to whom it is granted. The 14th Amendment diminishes that idea in totality. You fail to understand that we do not live in a direct democracy but, rather, a representative democratic republic with a supreme law that is the standard for determining rights, not the vote. That supreme law demands that contracts must be honored across state lines through the full faith and credit clause. Anything less is to diminish the sanctity of our Constitution.

  3. #1393
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:36 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    So say a State wanted to impose anti miscegnation laws?
    You're out of luck on trying to get that one passed. There was a short chapter in our history where a few states passed such laws, but the court (acting in accordance with the views of a vast majority of Americans) struck them down.

  4. #1394
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    So say a State wanted to impose anti miscegnation laws?
    For example?
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

  5. #1395
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    It most certainly is like any other contract. You have obligations and penalties for not meeting those obligations if you choose not to honor your contract.
    Is one of those obligations that you cannot enter into contract with another? Borrow money, does that mean you cannot contract with a different bank? Can you work for two employers at the same time? Can you have more than one employee? Are you denied ANY other contract based on the fact that the two entering this obligation are first cousins? Can you buy a home, share a business, incorporate, purchase an automobile, estate planning, enter into a small business...with your brother or mother, father or daughter, sister or son? In fact.....who would possibly deny you entry into any type of contract...from legal to corporate from warranty to real estate based on the fact that you're related. What other contract can you being first cousins get you denied? What other contract do you enter....denying you entry into ANY other similar contract...for the rest of your life or until the previous contract is null and void?

    I find it laughable that if you traveled to your neighboring state and they refused to honor your marriage now that you wouldn't take exception to it.
    Laugh all you want. If my state approves of polygamy and I take another wife....I'm not going to whine when my neighbors don't accept my behavior, much less my next state.

    What say you actually speak to what I said rather than some irrelevant bull**** about polygamy that was never even mentioned, hmm?
    Polygamy and the other issues are relevant and happen to be items you yourself deny others and use the government in doing so. Then whine when the definition doesn't mirror your personal opinions on the matter.

    No, We the People, do not define the institution when it comes to State sanctioned privilege and to whom it is granted.
    Not only have we defined this institution either through representation or referendum, it's been a recent reality in California, New York, and many other states.

    The 14th Amendment diminishes that idea in totality.
    This confusion why I would support a marriage amendment. The Doma not sweeping enough and results in confusing opinions like this.

    You fail to understand that we do not live in a direct democracy but, rather, a representative democratic republic with a supreme law that is the standard for determining rights, not the vote.
    I've repeatedly mentioned this issue being decided in representatie legislative manner making a law...defining marriage without the possibility of misinterpretation by any court. We the People...do determine our own rights...We the People define our own institutions, the courts governing at our consent.

    That supreme law demands that contracts must be honored across state lines through the full faith and credit clause.
    Argued time and again in courts across America.

    Same Sex Marriage: An Act of Law

    One of these areas of state sovereignty has traditionally been marriage. Thus the laws of one state regulating marriage are, on the face of things, entitled to the full faith and credit in all other states. However, in interpreting the full faith and credit clause, the courts have said that states are not required to automatically accept another state’s laws if to do so runs afoul of the second state’s own laws. In other words, the clause only requires that the second state enforce the first state’s laws only to the same extent as the second state enforces its own laws in the same matter.
    Thus, assuming the first state allows for same sex marriage, the enforceability of the first state’s laws in the second state depends on the laws of the second state dealing with marriage and the second state’s own “public policy” in regard to the same. Public policy often refers to some form of collective state morality or ethic, sometimes embodied in actual laws, sometimes not. Thus, the public policy and laws of the second state have to be at least co-equal or nearly so with the public policy and laws of the first state if the second state is to be required to enforce the same sex marriage that took effect in the first state.
    I highlighted the important points but, the link I found is well worth a read, gives you a history of this and then why the 14th doesn't apply.

    Anything less is to diminish the sanctity of our Constitution.
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

  6. #1396
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Martel View Post
    Is one of those obligations that you cannot enter into contract with another? Borrow money, does that mean you cannot contract with a different bank? Can you work for two employers at the same time? Can you have more than one employee?
    There are a ton of contracts that put just such stipulations on both parties. Entertainment industry contracts come to mind immediately.

    Are you denied ANY other contract based on the fact that the two entering this obligation are first cousins?
    Does that really matter? It's a stipulation for the contract. Contracts have all kinds of different stipulations. That just happens to be one for the marriage contract. Sorry you find that truth a little inconvenient but you just have to learn to live with reality at some point, won't you?

    Can you buy a home, share a business, incorporate, purchase an automobile, estate planning, enter into a small business...with your brother or mother, father or daughter, sister or son?
    Yeah, you can. It's called power of attorney. Look it up.

    In fact.....who would possibly deny you entry into any type of contract...from legal to corporate from warranty to real estate based on the fact that you're related. What other contract can you being first cousins get you denied? What other contract do you enter....denying you entry into ANY other similar contract...for the rest of your life or until the previous contract is null and void?
    Ummm, let's see. Lifetime rights contracts to parcels of land, employment contracts, representation contracts. You're just flat wrong on this count. The marriage contract is like any other contract in that it has stipulations placed on both parties with penalties for breaking the deal. Get over it.


    Laugh all you want. If my state approves of polygamy and I take another wife....I'm not going to whine when my neighbors don't accept my behavior, much less my next state.
    Except ummm, we aren't discussing polygamy here and you know that. When you want to get back on topic, let me know.

    Polygamy and the other issues are relevant and happen to be items you yourself deny others and use the government in doing so. Then whine when the definition doesn't mirror your personal opinions on the matter.
    Polygamy is a direct violation of the marriage contract in that it circumvents the requirement that you name a single person as irreplacable to you. The only one whining here is you. And that whining is irrelevant to the topic the rest of us are actually discussing.

    Not only have we defined this institution either through representation or referendum, it's been a recent reality in California, New York, and many other states.



    This confusion why I would support a marriage amendment. The Doma not sweeping enough and results in confusing opinions like this.
    Your confusion is your problem, pal. I'm not surprised that you are confused given the strange ideas you have already developed concerning how a representative republic operates.

    I've repeatedly mentioned this issue being decided in representatie legislative manner making a law...defining marriage without the possibility of misinterpretation by any court. We the People...do determine our own rights...We the People define our own institutions, the courts governing at our consent.
    No, we the people vote in our representatives. Court appointees serve for life, not at our consent, but at the consent of our representatives. The Constitution is the framework of our rights and the courts interpret laws, created by our legislature, against that framework.

    This is elementary civics. You should go back and brush up.

    Argued time and again in courts across America.

    Same Sex Marriage: An Act of Law

    And nowhere in that is there any indication that one state may dissolve a contract formed in another state.

    I highlighted the important points but, the link I found is well worth a read, gives you a history of this and then why the 14th doesn't apply.
    Yes, a great amount of opinion. Thank you...but you know what they say about opinions...

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
    Thank you for repeating the basics, Captain Obvious. Now would you like to make a point with it?

  7. #1397
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    There are a ton of contracts that put just such stipulations on both parties. Entertainment industry contracts come to mind immediately.
    The entertainment industry has a restriction on entering contracts with your first cousin? Oh, you can't do any movies when yer already under contract...sort of like a record label and a rock band? What nonsense.

    Does that really matter? It's a stipulation for the contract. Contracts have all kinds of different stipulations. That just happens to be one for the marriage contract. Sorry you find that truth a little inconvenient but you just have to learn to live with reality at some point, won't you?
    No, the marriage contract has very unique stipulations, and I don't think recent events in NewJersey or California are summarized in your version of the truth. What's clear and plain is that the vast majority of We the People do not approve, nor will ever approves of same sex marriage, a truth you must learn to live with. It's like, 0-31 in referendum.

    Yeah, you can. It's called power of attorney. Look it up.
    Yeah, I know you can as well. You cannot enter into marriage with any of these people though huh? Unique stipulations and all.

    The marriage contract is like any other contract in that it has stipulations placed on both parties with penalties for breaking the deal. Get over it.
    I've just shown it's not like any other contract nor considered as such by the majority of Americans. It isn't I that needs to get over anything.

    Except ummm, we aren't discussing polygamy here and you know that. When you want to get back on topic, let me know.
    Because you yourself use the State government to deny polygamists what they feel is their right and freedom, isn't a valid reason to dismiss the subtopic. I'll continue to use it as a stark example and continue to remind you that you're denying marriage 'rights' to many people who have a host of marriage definitions or don't feel government should be licensing at all.

    Polygamy is a direct violation of the marriage contract in that it circumvents the requirement that you name a single person as irreplacable to you. The only one whining here is you. And that whining is irrelevant to the topic the rest of us are actually discussing.
    And exactly whose requirement is that? Government's? Didn't you mean to say it circumvents We the People's requirement you name a single person as irreplaceable?

    Your confusion is your problem, pal. I'm not surprised that you are confused given the strange ideas you have already developed concerning how a representative republic operates.
    Sticks and stones and you know I'm correct here.

    And nowhere in that is there any indication that one state may dissolve a contract formed in another state.
    I just showed you there was, your in error.

    Thank you for repeating the basics, Captain Obvious. Now would you like to make a point with it?
    Sure, it comes 4 amendments before your 14th.
    Last edited by Charles Martel; 01-25-10 at 03:29 PM.
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

  8. #1398
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Martel View Post
    The entertainment industry has a restriction on entering contracts with your first cousin? Oh, you can't do any movies when yer already under contract...sort of like a record label and a rock band? What nonsense.
    Reading is fundamental. Perhaps you should go back and look at the block of text you quoted and see how it is separated from your rubbish about first cousins. When you are capable of that small comprehension, I will be more than happy to address the remainder of your points.

    Let me know when you have succeeded so we can continue.
    Last edited by jallman; 01-25-10 at 03:43 PM.

  9. #1399
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I will be more than happy to address the remainder of your points.
    Can you do it without insults? Because I am scorching your every argument here and easily shooting down any tangents you begin, is no reason to get personal. I sense a lil tension between us and there is really no reason for it. I'm absolutely correct here, your arguments aren't, it's as simple as that really.

    Hope yer havin a good day.
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

  10. #1400
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Martel View Post
    Can you do it without insults? Because I am scorching your every argument here and easily shooting down any tangents you begin, is no reason to get personal. I sense a lil tension between us and there is really no reason for it. I'm absolutely correct here, your arguments aren't, it's as simple as that really.

    Hope yer havin a good day.
    It must be so nice for you that you live so far removed from reality. The only thing you have managed to scorch is your own credibility and my confidence in your ability to read what is presented to you.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •