Page 174 of 189 FirstFirst ... 74124164172173174175176184 ... LastLast
Results 1,731 to 1,740 of 1882

Thread: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

  1. #1731
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:15 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    LOL however you wish.

    If the women's bathroom line is too long and I gotta go, I'm going in the men's bathroom. Simple as.

    We have men's and women's bathrooms here at work and they are absolutely identical. They are also one person only bathrooms. We all use them as though they are unisex even though they are designated otherwise. It would be stupid not to. Why should I stand in the hall trying not to piss my pants when there's a perfectly good bathroom right in front of me that just happens to have "Men" written on the door? It's silly.

    But, no one stops me or anyone else from using that bathroom. So, there's no reason for me to petition the company to have unisex bathrooms.
    Haha - and this is in Virginia?? I know of at least a few college dorms (mostly in CA) that are unisex (or "gender neutral") - that brings it up a whole level. Not just shared toilets, but showers etc.

    The absolute worst are sporting venues, although some bars can be pretty bad, too.

  2. #1732
    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 CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Absolutely nothing. tex still doesn't understand how one defines sexual orientation and that polygamy is not one. Pay him no mind.
    And you can't even read a CDC study. You lost pages ago but you just haven't admitted it.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  3. #1733
    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
    So what about marriage? If the state stops mandating the gender roles of marriage does that somehow affect the argument that marriage should be restricted to two people?
    Because it breaks equal protection under the law as you just stated. Why would it not cover more than two people? How could you restrict it?

    Why is it discrimnatory? What class of people does it discriminate against? Sex, men and women, are a protected class, just like race is a protected class.

    Whereas sexual orientation is not a protected class, nor are polygamists or pedophiles. The judge found a wealth of evidence to support that the state had no rational grounds by which to prohibit two people of the same sex from marrying. Whereas polygamists and pedophiles are not only not a protected class, but they are not supported by any credible evidence.
    If you claim more than 2 people cannot marry what are you pointing to that invalidates the 14th ammendment coverage based on this ruling? Explain yourself.

    and person does not have an age limit so in come the adults who want to marry children. Once again, explain yourself. You are fabricating these protected classes that have nothing to do with the Equal Protection clause.

    Nope, only protected classes.
    That doesn't fly. The 14th ammendement Equal protection clause says:

    "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"

    Any person. Not protected classes. PERSON. So again, how can you discriminate against people who are Polygamists for example? Explain how.
    Last edited by texmaster; 08-09-10 at 04:54 PM.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  4. #1734
    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 texmaster View Post
    And you can't even read a CDC study. You lost pages ago but you just haven't admitted it.
    The greater point is IT DOESN'T MATTER AT ALL. It has nothing to do with the argument. It's OFF-TOPIC.

  5. #1735
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:15 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by FilmFestGuy View Post
    The greater point is IT DOESN'T MATTER AT ALL. It has nothing to do with the argument. It's OFF-TOPIC.
    Why not yell at the guy doing the baiting?

  6. #1736
    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 FilmFestGuy View Post
    The greater point is IT DOESN'T MATTER AT ALL. It has nothing to do with the argument. It's OFF-TOPIC.
    It was a counter to his argument. Go back and read what he advocated. I've only explained it a dozen times.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  7. #1737
    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 texmaster View Post
    Because it breaks equal protection under the law as you just stated. Why would it not cover more than two people? How could you restrict it?

    Why is it discrimnatory? What class of people does it discriminate against? Sex, men and women, are a protected class, just like race is a protected class.

    Whereas sexual orientation is not a protected class, nor are polygamists or pedophiles. The judge found a wealth of evidence to support that the state had no rational grounds by which to prohibit two people of the same sex from marrying. Whereas polygamists and pedophiles are not only not a protected class, but they are not supported by any credible evidence.

    If you claim more than 2 people cannot marry what are you pointing to that invalidates the 14th ammendment coverage based on this ruling? Explain yourself.



    Nope, only protected classes.
    Gender is a protected class. Women were discriminated against by the state in that they were told they could only marry men (and vice-versa) and it wasn't in the state's interest to prevent it. It's really not that hard to figure out.

    Yes, we keep saying that he made "same-sex marriage legal" (because he did) - but legally, what he did is struck down gender-discrimination in marriage law.

    There is no way polygamists, pedophiles, or animal-humpers could argue that this case means they can get married now. It can't be argued. It doesn't address age; it doesn't address animals; and it doesn't address numbers.

    They can NOT use that argument.

    Again, you're getting your panties in a bunch over something that will not happen. It's not there. It's only in your (and others) imaginations. You're making something up to get nervous about.

  8. #1738
    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 texmaster View Post
    It was a counter to his argument. Go back and read what he advocated. I've only explained it a dozen times.
    No - I got involved in your little side argument about HIV only briefly. Since then, I've just been trying to get you guys back on topic - which is gay marriage.

    Your little side topic really, really, really needs to be moved into a different thread. I don't care who brought it up or why. I'm just tired of off-topic discussions that go back and forth and back and forth for 20 pages.

  9. #1739
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,124

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Any person. Not protected classes. PERSON. So again, how can you discriminate against people who are Polygamists for example? Explain how.
    That would be why the Federal government created protected classes for cases of discrimination.

    As I said with CC, I don't believe that Walker even ruled that Prop 8 was unconstitutional on the basis that it violated the 14th amendment by discriminating against sexual orientation. I believe he overturned it on the basis that it discriminated again sex. Things like sex, race, age, etc. are protected classes by federal law, and things like polygamy, pedophilia, and sexual orientation are not. I read through the ruling and it seemed to me that he was saying the state had no rational or legitimate interest in mandating gender roles in marriage, and therefore could not lawfully discriminate against a man choosing to marry a man or a woman choosing to marry a woman. Whether or not they were homosexual couples seemed to be irrelevant.

    As FilmFestGuy has stated, your polygamy argument is now irrelevant. This was a case of gender discrimination in marriage, which was why it was overturned. Gender discrimination is not a grounds by which polygamists, pedophiles, or zoophiles can argue for the right to marry.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 08-09-10 at 05:07 PM.

  10. #1740
    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: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    How could you restrict it?
    There are a few ways. One is on rights issues. Polygamy rarely works out in a non-oppressive manner. We even still have modern day examples of this in the US. If this were done in a way that completely abides by the rights of the individual, you can try to work around that. But the polygamist communities such as in Arizona, that's not how it works in practice. So you can always go that route.

    Another way is to site precedent. Which would be Utah. It was not even allowed into the Republic unless it made polygamy illegal.
    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."

Posting Permissions

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