Page 170 of 189 FirstFirst ... 70120160168169170171172180 ... LastLast
Results 1,691 to 1,700 of 1882

Thread: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

  1. #1691
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I'm not talking about polygamy. I'm talking about other sexual orientations such as pansexuals, bestiality, bisexuals, or any other sexuality that someone could claim to have. Why is that sexuality unequal to homosexuality? And if the logic is that homosexual unions fall under the equal protection clause, why can't others as well?
    Pansexuals and bisexuals can marry. They just have to pick the person they want to marry. I have a female friend who is bisexual, but fell in love with a man and she's committed to him. Just as when you marry a woman, you might find other women attractive, you just don't act on it. That's common sense humanity.

    Bestiality -easy. Animals can't sign contracts. Animals can't consent to sex with a human, therefore it's animal abuse.

    This is a gender based. That's it. It violates equal protection because a man has the right to marry a woman, but a woman does not (and vice versa). To discriminate as such, the state is required to prove that harm would be caused to the state were the discrimination lifted. Considering 18,000 same-sex couples were already married in the state and harm could not be argued, it had to be overturned.

    You are required by the Constitution to treat all citizens equally regardless of gender unless it is proven to be in the state's interest. Even if a majority thinks it's in their interest, that matters not. In the South (less so in the North), a majority thought that blacks and white shouldn't marry and passed laws that said so. The Supreme Court said that Virginia failed to show how such discrimination was necessary to preserve order in the state. It was therefore overturned.

    This is no different. It does not open doors for polygamists. It does not open doors for pedophiles. It does not open doors for beastialists (is that word?). All of these restrictions are easy to prove where harm would occur to the state and its citizens were they to argue for marriage rights. This has been shown to you and other on multiple occasions.

    It's really not that hard to figure out.

    Those of you who are so adamantly against same-sex marriage will look to your grandchildren just as bad as the people who fought to keep people of different races from inter-marrying. You won't look noble. You will be viewed as either quaint or bigoted by future generations. It's your choice.

  2. #1692
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    You are confusing correlation and causation again and still don't understand what a risk factor is.
    No, YOU are confusing correlation and causation, again, and still don't understand the concept of a risk factor, or orientation, or behavior.
    "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"

  3. #1693
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Why are they more likely to engage in risky sexual behaviors?
    For starters...

    Because they don't have to contend with pregnancy, and thus are less likely to use condoms.
    Because they generally don't have the social norms of an institution like marriage to promote life long mongamous relationships.
    Because the gay culture has, until recently, encouraged unrestricted sexual expression among gay men.
    Because schools don't offer homosexual sexual education which could educate people about the risks of such behaviors and how to be responsible.

  4. #1694
    don't panic
    marduc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    10-22-17 @ 04:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,301

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Well, no we've been through this... (See Marduc's post)
    And why are you going to latch onto my post and try to misrepresent it? If the partner had not cheated he would not have the virus..(and no he did not cheat because he was gay, he cheated because he was unfaithful) therefore it was the partner cheating that caused the disease to spread, IE that is the cause (to be redundantly redundant).

    For someone who claimed this

    I'm tired of all this causation/correlation crap myself. I only bring it up because people have been going on and on about it in this thread with respect to sexual orientation.
    you sure seem hung up on continuously harping on it, kinda makes it seem like a very disingenuous statement <shrug>
    Last edited by marduc; 08-09-10 at 03:22 PM.
    Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
    Drugs are bad, prohibition is worse

  5. #1695
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    I wasn't the one who brought up morality. I was responding to the comment that bestiality is not recognized as marriage because it is deviant. And my morality is allowed to play into my vote.
    Your morality can certainly influence your vote. I never said it couldn't.

    Others have no right to impose their morality that homosexuality is moral and their unions are "marriage" onto everyone living in a state.
    No one is imposing morality on YOU. YOU are not required to marry a homosexual. If your morality is offended by others marrying homosexuals, tough ****. You have no right to NOT be offended.



    So now you are bringing up morality? There have also been clinical studies that would suggest homosexuality develops due to sexual abuse, physical abuse, and emotional instability. Bias clinical studies mean nothing to me.
    If biased clinical studies mean nothing to you, than everything you just stated is irrelevant. Prove your assertions with those studies and we'll see just how valid they are.
    "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. #1696
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:33 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    Has nothing to do with sexuality. Has to do with horses not being persons allowed to enter into contracts.
    Tell that to PETA and many atheists who believe all life is equal with human life. Again, that is a moral stance. Many believe that animals can consent. And many believe there is no difference or worth between human and animal life. It has to do with the fact that zoophilia is considered immoral by most.
    I believe that if you can prove that horses and blow up dolls are capable of understanding legal contracts, and capable of understanding the implications of them, then that would be a HUGE step towards the government granting them adult personhood rights to enter into contracts.
    So, should the mentally ill be banned from marriage? Should everyone be forced to read the marriage contract and take a comprehension test on it? My point is that if sexuality is protected by the equal protection clause, than why not other sexualities? I think your argument is logically consistent though, and I agree about consent. My point is why can't animals even enter into a civil union with someone? Why can't a man legally leave his belongings to his pet dog under some form of contract? Why is it ok to discriminate on other sexualities but homosexuality gets a pass?
    It's not a moral stance or belief so much as a scientific one. Prove that blowup dolls are capable of understanding contracts and their legal implications and there ya go! You'll have your new bride. Morality has nothing to do with it.
    I stated before, if it's about consent I agree with you. However, is it wrong to discriminate against other sexualities and not give them some form of union that is on par with that sexualities union? I concede that you are right in the consent issue. And it's foolish of me to argue otherwise
    So, once more... this is about GENDER, not sexual orientation. How many times does that need to be spelled out for you? No one asks you your sexual orientation when you get a marriage license.
    The roles of marriage is husband and wife. Those are gender specific roles. It's not wrong to say a woman can't be a husband, because she cannot be. It's not wrong to say a man can be a wife, because he cannot be. On a straight marriage license, a man cannot register for the position of wife, nor can a woman register for the position of husband. The terms husband and wife are gender specific, and they have gender specific roles (such as childbirth, impregnation, etc).

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Your morality can certainly influence your vote. I never said it couldn't.
    Fair enough, sorry for a false accusation

    No one is imposing morality on YOU. YOU are not required to marry a homosexual. If your morality is offended by others marrying homosexuals, tough ****. You have no right to NOT be offended.
    Yes they are, the state is taking a moral stance that homosexual unions are just as much a marriage as a traditional heterosexual one. The state would be acting upon a moral issue and taking a moral stance against the will and morals of the majority. I have said this before, there would be no legal recourse or complaint if the majority voted for a marriage definition hat included same sex relationships. The state would be imposing one moral stance as superior to the other. That is absolutely imposing morals upon an entire society.


    If biased clinical studies mean nothing to you, than everything you just stated is irrelevant. Prove your assertions with those studies and we'll see just how valid they are.
    Here is an essay that was written and is backed up by numerous scientific sources that states that homosexuality may develop due to sexual, physical, and emotional abuse. http://www.home60515.com/3.html
    Last edited by digsbe; 08-09-10 at 03:28 PM.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  7. #1697
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    ...
    You keep trying to make this about morality. It has nothing to do with morality. We live in a Consitutional Republic. That means the law of the land and the ulimate will of the people is the Federal Constitution. A state is perfectly entitled to legistlate morality. However, a state cannot legistlate morality in a way that violates the Federal Consitution. The judge found that Proposition 8 violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment of the Federal Consitution. Therefore he overturned Prop 8.

  8. #1698
    Hippie Hater
    texmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Dallas TEXAS
    Last Seen
    08-20-15 @ 01:17 AM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,969

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    You keep trying to make this about morality. It has nothing to do with morality. We live in a Consitutional Republic. That means the law of the land and the ulimate will of the people is the Federal Constitution. A state is perfectly entitled to legistlate morality. However, a state cannot legistlate morality in a way that violates the Federal Consitution. The judge found that Proposition 8 violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment of the Federal Consitution. Therefore he overturned Prop 8.
    Then you have to let everyone in under that general finding. Every alternative lifestyle dealing with people. Nothing could be exempt.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  9. #1699
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Here is an essay that was written and is backed up by numerous scientific sources that states that homosexuality may develop due to sexual, physical, and emotional abuse. Sexual Abuse: A Major Cause Of Homosexuality?
    Uh oh. You done it now kid. Not a good idea to try to argue the science of homosexuality with Captain.

  10. #1700
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,127

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Then you have to let everyone in under that general finding. Every alternative lifestyle dealing with people. Nothing could be exempt.
    Except, Walker didn't base his ruling on sexual orientation. He based his ruling on the fact that the state had no interest in denying men the right to marry men and women the right to marry women. In other words, he based his ruling on that Prop 8 discrimianted against sex, not sexual orientation. He argued that the state had no interest in mandating gender roles.

Posting Permissions

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