Page 8 of 61 FirstFirst ... 6789101858 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 609

Thread: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overturn

  1. #71
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Not true. I needed no parental concent for my jobs when I was under 18.
    That's odd, and would depend on the age of consent laws of the individual state. I got my first job at 14. I had to get my Jr. High and my parents to sign contracts to allow me to do it. Before age of consent for a contract, a minor always has to have the signature of their guardian to go along with it.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  2. #72
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overturn Law - Politics & Policy - Catholic Online

    Read the article. Is the anti-homosexual marriage side defender on crack?

    Seriously. Marriage is for making babies? Has he been living in a BOX for his whole life? If that's the best the anti-gay marriage side can do, gay marriage is coming a hell of a lot faster to this country then I initially believed.
    Its a catholic publication. I am pretty sure that they do view marriage to be for making babies, especially given their stance on birth control.

    I disagree with them, but I think they are being logically consistent on this one.

  3. #73
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:32 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,272
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Thsi is about legal justification for allowing gay marriage. I am addressing the false claim that the legal justification lies in the genetic argument. Try to keep up.
    Who is making that claim here?
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #74
    Guru
    Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    02-13-17 @ 04:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,962

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    They're not red herrings when the arguments being used to justify same sex marriage would also justify incestuous and polygamous marriages-- you can't argue that the State cannot prohibit consenting adults from marrying whomever they choose and then argue that the State can continue to prohibit certain couples from doing so. If you concede that the State has a legitimate interest in regulating marriage, you concede that it has the authority to prohibit same sex marriages as well, whether or not you believe that they should do so. In order to argue that the State should allow same sex marriages without allowing any marriage, you have to show some reason that same sex marriages benefit society in a way that incestuous and/or polygamous marriages do not.



    Marriage is not a contract, and my response to Redress above indicates why it should not be considered as one. Marriage is a social institution that involves more than just the two spouses.
    If people consent to marriage in any form, it is their business. I prefer to let people live their own lives.

    The definition of marriage: "(1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage"

    Marriage is a contract. The Contracts Clause could very well apply here.

    Marriage - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
    "Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." -Ronald Reagan

  5. #75
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,626

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Thsi is about legal justification for allowing gay marriage. I am addressing the false claim that the legal justification lies in the genetic argument. Try to keep up.
    I would agree with you. There is no legal justification in the genetic argument... for either homosexuality OR heterosexuality. You continue to demonstrate that you do not know the difference between sexual orientation and sexual behavior. I'm going to continue to point this out every time you demonstrate it in your posts. Which is pretty much every time you post on this topic. Now, you can choose to not respond to it, but I'm going to post it, anyway, because it's accurate and I do not want someone coming here and gathering inaccurate information without me correcting it.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  6. #76
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,626

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Gene already found. Enjoy

    Gene for Left-Handed Trait Discovered
    Cool. Have the found the gene for heterosexuality, yet?
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  7. #77
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Yes, there is a difference that makes GM different from the red herrings. The argument for gay marriage is that it is not harmfull(and as such the government should not disallow it), and that it is beneficial to society in providing stability both for the couple, but also for any children of that couple. I looked the numbers up recently for another thread, and roughly 1/3 of lesbian couples have a child living with them for a portion of the time, and 1/4 of gay male couples, and this number is rising.

    Incestuous relationships can probably be argued as harmful(I am not particularly knowledgeable on the subject, so it's a guess), and I believe that polygamist relationships are not believed to be stable environments for raising children.
    There you go. Those are good arguments in favor of same sex marriage that don't start us on the slippery slope. The problem is, as long as people argue that people should be allowed to marry whomever they want, that slippery slope is going to be there-- and that argument continues to be an integral part of most peoples' arguments in favor of same sex marriage. As much as I support same sex marriage (and even polygamy), I am much more opposed to establishing a legal precedent in which marriage to any consenting adult is considered either a simple contract or a matter of civil rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Why is it hypocrisy to support one thing, and not support different things?
    It isn't hypocritical to support same sex marriage and oppose incest and polygamy. It's hypocritical to say that consenting adults should be able to marry anyone they want, even if the majority is morally opposed to it, and then make exceptions for couples whose marriages you are morally opposed to.

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    As far as the state is concerned, marriage is a license you have to apply for. Couples need this license to have a ceremony and then qualify for certain legal rights and privileges. Gay couples would like to apply for this license and then get these privileges.
    And I have no problem with that. I have no problem with expanding the institution of marriage to include same sex couples. It's expanding it any further than that that I object to, and as long as the arguments in favor of expanding marriage to include same sex couples would also logically apply to other prohibited couples, I feel obligated to oppose them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    The way I see it, we have the right to do anything and everything that we want, until the government can show a compelling reason why they shouldn't allow me.
    Thing is, marriage isn't something individuals do. It's something the State does to benefit those individuals, in order to encourage behavior that benefits society. In order to convince the State to perform marriage for different types of couples, those couples-- and people who advocate on their behalf-- should be able to show that doing so would likewise be beneficial to society.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    "But Deuce, you're not even gay, why do you care? Why would you want the right to marry a dude?"

    "The same reason I don't own a gun but want the right to own a gun: It's none of your damned business!"
    What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom is not the State's business. What two consenting adults do in public, in the courtroom, absolutely is.

  8. #78
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:32 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,272
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    There you go. Those are good arguments in favor of same sex marriage that don't start us on the slippery slope. The problem is, as long as people argue that people should be allowed to marry whomever they want, that slippery slope is going to be there-- and that argument continues to be an integral part of most peoples' arguments in favor of same sex marriage. As much as I support same sex marriage (and even polygamy), I am much more opposed to establishing a legal precedent in which marriage to any consenting adult is considered either a simple contract or a matter of civil rights.
    I do not make that argument though. I make the argument that gay people should be allowed to marry for the reasons I explained.

    It isn't hypocritical to support same sex marriage and oppose incest and polygamy. It's hypocritical to say that consenting adults should be able to marry anyone they want, even if the majority is morally opposed to it, and then make exceptions for couples whose marriages you are morally opposed to.
    That is not my argument, so there is no hypocrisy.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #79
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,626

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Here's a post that I wrote a while back, logically demonstrating how the GM to polygamous marriage scenario are NOT consistent and are very different things:

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    But, you see, this entire, "if we allow homosexual marriage, polygamy is next" argument is extraordinarily weak, considering that the similarities between the two do not exist. Allow me to explain from both an individual and a societal standpoint.

    First. let us take a look at the difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals. The striking difference is obvious. Homosexuals have a sexual orientation towards those of the same sex, whereas heterosexuals have a sexual orientation towards those of the opposite sex. Why would a heterosexual woman want to marry a man? Sexual orientation. Why would a homosexual man want to marry a man? Sexual orientation. Clearly, from an individual standpoint, this is a, if not the main reason for one wanting to marry a specific other. Love, attraction, emotion. Now, this does not justify gay marriage being validated, and, in fact is a weak argument that I never make. Love, attraction, and emotion does not benefit the state, which is why marriage exists. However, polygamy does not fit well in the criteria that I have identified. There is no polygamous sexual orientation. Polygamy is, typically, a heterosexual orientation, covered already. However, being that there is no polygamous sexual orientation, using this, a mainstay of the individual reason for marriage, will not work or apply. Therefore, polygamy from an individual standpoint, does not meet the same criteria for marriage as do homosexuals or heterosexuals. Lack of orientation.

    Now, we move into the societal realm. Government supports marriage for a few reasons. The productive rearing of children is most important. Creating a stable family life is also key: it adds to the positive potential for healthy children, but it also creates healthy adults. There is plenty of evidence to support the theory that those who live in a healthy, stable, committed relationship, are happier, healthier, and are more productive members of society. These are all things that benefit the state. Research shows that, regardless of sexual orientation, gay or straight, folks who live in these kinds of committed relationships, do better, and rear children better, than those who do not. This is regardless of sexual orientation. This is the second piece of the argument that will, eventually win the day for gay marriage. Polygamy does not offer the same benefits. And the answer to "why" is simple, and is psychological in nature. Jealousy, rivalry, and inconsistency. Just like my argument that psychology cannot be separated from economics, hence, because of greed, pure forms of both socialism and libertarianism are destined to be complete failures, neither can human psychology be separated from this issue. What is the number one cause of divorce? Adultery. Why? Jealousy and rivalry. In a multi-partner marriage, it would be impossible for their not to be some sort of hierarchy, and even if this is agreed upon, one cannot eliminate one's emotions. With this type of emotional instability at the familial structure's core, a healthy, committed relationship, similar to that of a single partner marriage, could not be obtained. Further, the inconsistency in caretaking responsibilities and in child rearing responsibilities, compounded by the hierarchies and rivalries will harm the children, affecting their functioning. We already see some of this in divorced families, where inconsistent rules, non-existent co-parenting, and rivalries, negatively affect children.

    Lastly, though there is plenty of research that supports both heterosexual and homosexual unions as being beneficial, there is none that supports polygamy.

    All of this shows how there is not correlation nor slippery slope from homosexual to polygamous marriage. Polygamy, for the reasons I identified, is not only a very different animal than homosexual marriage, but has none of the similar benefits to the state that the government currently sees marriage as.

    Polygamy as a reaction to homosexual marriage is a smokescreen and an invalid comparison.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  10. #80
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,736

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    There you go. Those are good arguments in favor of same sex marriage that don't start us on the slippery slope. The problem is, as long as people argue that people should be allowed to marry whomever they want, that slippery slope is going to be there-- and that argument continues to be an integral part of most peoples' arguments in favor of same sex marriage. As much as I support same sex marriage (and even polygamy), I am much more opposed to establishing a legal precedent in which marriage to any consenting adult is considered either a simple contract or a matter of civil rights.



    It isn't hypocritical to support same sex marriage and oppose incest and polygamy. It's hypocritical to say that consenting adults should be able to marry anyone they want, even if the majority is morally opposed to it, and then make exceptions for couples whose marriages you are morally opposed to.



    And I have no problem with that. I have no problem with expanding the institution of marriage to include same sex couples. It's expanding it any further than that that I object to, and as long as the arguments in favor of expanding marriage to include same sex couples would also logically apply to other prohibited couples, I feel obligated to oppose them.



    Thing is, marriage isn't something individuals do. It's something the State does to benefit those individuals, in order to encourage behavior that benefits society. In order to convince the State to perform marriage for different types of couples, those couples-- and people who advocate on their behalf-- should be able to show that doing so would likewise be beneficial to society.



    What two consenting adults do in the privacy of their bedroom is not the State's business. What two consenting adults do in public, in the courtroom, absolutely is.
    And what state interest is furthered by preventing two men from getting married? Keeping in mind that same-sex couples have been scientifically shown to be just as stable for raising children as a heterosexual couple.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Page 8 of 61 FirstFirst ... 6789101858 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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