Page 136 of 189 FirstFirst ... 3686126134135136137138146186 ... LastLast
Results 1,351 to 1,360 of 1882

Thread: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

  1. #1351
    Sage

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

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Identity, and whether is serves any state interest to restrict it.

    Tim-
    IMHO it really does not serve any state interest to not have gay marriage recognized by the state other than politicians playing off populism.

  2. #1352
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    In my opinion I thought Walkers decision was very well put together. I have some minor criticisms but nothing that rises to the level how I think the SCOTUS will interpret it.

    Namely as an example, one criticism I have is in the find of facts section page 65, where the state exclams that a fact is that no fault divorce has had no measurable affect on marriage divorce. However, it omits that, CA does not recognize verbal vows as part of the marriage contract, when in fact it should. The verbal vows to each other, although usually performed in a church, but can also be done anywhere, including in front of a justice, are part of the marriage contract. So, there is a glaring contradiction as to the validity of the contract, if the state dismisses the contract in no fault divorce. If it dismisses it, or any written, or verbal promises requisit to the contract of marriage, should the right to contract be a part of any EPC challenge? I say no..


    Thoughts?


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  3. #1353
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    Bottom line is this judge should have reclused himself because he is gay.................
    Why do you presume that a gay judge is biased and a straight judge is not?
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  4. #1354
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    Just because you keep preaching that lie does not mean it will happen........31-0 states banning same sex marriage with a constitutional amendment....Many will be added this November.....45 states have DOMAS saying marriage is between a man and a woman........California one of the most liberal states in the nation has said marriage is between a man and a woman......Every time gay marriage has been voted on gay marriage ahs lost.......You lose DD and you will continue to lose.........
    But what you are ignoring (probably because you are afraid) is that the margins are getting smaller and smaller and smaller. Ten years ago, gay marriage was disapproved of by over 20 points. Today it is pretty evenly divided.

    If you aren't losing the war, Navy.....how do you explain that?

    Be afraid...old man.....because it is coming and you are going to live to see it.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  5. #1355
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    But what you are ignoring (probably because you are afraid) is that the margins are getting smaller and smaller and smaller. Ten years ago, gay marriage was disapproved of by over 20 points. Today it is pretty evenly divided.

    If you aren't losing the war, Navy.....how do you explain that?

    Be afraid...old man.....because it is coming and you are going to live to see it.
    Now that's baiting^^^


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  6. #1356
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,649

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    CC -

    You've done no such thing. Marduc, on the other hand at least made an attempt to point out why he thoughts something I asserted was incorrect. You, to date, have NEVER made an equal attempt. All you do, (in fact on this forum from everything I've read from you) is claim that someone is wrong, or committed some error in reasoning, and claim victory based on your accusation alone. Well, I have noticed that for some here, that follow you blindly, it is sufficient for them that because you say something is so, it is so. But in the real world, and with an opponent (Like me) that carries with him years of debate experience, and the intellectual capacity to spot your "technique", you're rather very pathetic when it comes to debate. Let me make it crystal clear for you one last time. When you accuse someone of faulty reasoning, or making an error in logic, it is customary among courteous people to make the argument as to why you think they are wrong. It is NOT enough to simply say, "because I said so".. Do you understand that. For example, if I enter a thread, and say to X member that they made an error in reasoning, or they perhaps inadvertently made a logical error, I will show them why. I will say something to the affect: "Here's why you're wrong" and then continue to paint the picture. You so far are incapable of that courtesy. And for someone named, "CaptainCourtesy", I would have expected more.
    Everytime I have debated you in a thread, I have demonstrated your complete lack of a logical argument. I have no reason to engage in evidentiary debate with someone like you who cannot argue logically. I have told you that repeatedly, yet you continue to demonstrate no improvement in your abilities. It is amusing watching you try, though.

    I know that you don't like me, and I'm ok with that, but one thing I am not, is a liar, nor am I discourteous to other members. I respect all opinions on the face. When you continue to make accusations that someone is wrong without providing substance, you invalidate your presence in a debate thread. I know some don't see it that way here, but I do.
    I have no opinion on you, personally. And I do not respect opinions that are based on lack of logic and are presented as facts. That's what you do. I will continue to confront you on this. If you don't like it, don't do it.

    What audacity to demand I prove my assertions, when you yourself have never done so. But, no matter, as I stated above, my illustration on polygamy was only to add weight to the argument I was making concerning fundamental rights, and marriage. In that premise alone, polygamy, under the current understanding of what constitutes a fundamental right to marriage, is as equally valid as GM, and Straight marriage, period. And that's all I was saying..
    In other words, as usual, you have nothing and refuse to respond. Check.
    "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. #1357
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,649

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    That was an extremely lucid argument, but I still have to disagree with you. If polygamy is more unprotected than sexual orientation, then we have to look for the underlying reason why either would be more unprotected than traditional marriage. That both gay and polygamous marriage would be more unprotected than traditional marriage comes from the same source, namely religion. Therefore, I would assert that 1) The equal protection clause is being violated in both cases and 2) The government is respecting an establishment of religion here. IMHO, this makes discrimination against either gay or polygamous marriages unconstitutional.
    You are wrong, dana. There is more of a difference between polygamy and GM than just what Zyph posted. The government sanctions marriage for a variety of reasons... and these reasons closely resemble the outcomes of GM... but are far removed from those of polygamy. Here, from a post that I made a while back:

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    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"

  8. #1358
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    CC -
    Everytime I have debated you in a thread, I have demonstrated your complete lack of a logical argument.
    No you have debated me citing a lack of logic, but provided no material foundation for your accusations. EVER.. Not once, nadda, zero zilch..

    I have no reason to engage in evidentiary debate with someone like you who cannot argue logically
    Yes you keep saying that, but so what? Show me where I'm illogical, or irrational, and you're comment has validity, refuse to, and you cast doubt as to your skill in debate.

    I have told you that repeatedly, yet you continue to demonstrate no improvement in your abilities. It is amusing watching you try, though.
    I'm glad it amuses you. I have no ego to bruise, Sir. Assuming that was the intent of the comment?

    And I do not respect opinions that are based on lack of logic and are presented as facts. That's what you do. I will continue to confront you on this. If you don't like it, don't do it
    Ah, I see. So, basically you want me to stop arguing my point of view?

    In other words, as usual, you have nothing and refuse to respond. Check.
    I did, read on.. Can you formulate a coherent argument that refutes my assertions? No fair to say something isn't logical, "just because".. k?


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  9. #1359
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy
    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
    I refuted this..


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  10. #1360
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,649

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    CC -

    No you have debated me citing a lack of logic, but provided no material foundation for your accusations. EVER.. Not once, nadda, zero zilch..
    Whenever I do that, I cite the logical fallacy you commit, be it a false premise or whatever. You don't like it. I don't care that you don't like it.

    Yes you keep saying that, but so what? Show me where I'm illogical, or irrational, and you're comment has validity, refuse to, and you cast doubt as to your skill in debate.
    Actually present an argument, or a counter argument to anything I say, and I will, when it occurs.



    I'm glad it amuses you. I have no ego to bruise, Sir. Assuming that was the intent of the comment?
    It was snarkiness, responding to your snarkiness. Don't like it? Don't do it. Otherwise, I have no problem responding in kind.



    Ah, I see. So, basically you want me to stop arguing my point of view?
    By following this line, you are stating that your opinions are based on lack of logic and presented as facts. Feel free to argue this way. You will get called on it, though.



    I did, read on.. Can you formulate a coherent argument that refutes my assertions? No fair to say something isn't logical, "just because".. k?


    Tim-
    No, you didn't. You presented NOTHING... as usual. You made a statement with nothing behind it. Can we be expecting a coherent and logical argument from you soon?
    "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"

Posting Permissions

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