Page 187 of 189 FirstFirst ... 87137177185186187188189 LastLast
Results 1,861 to 1,870 of 1882

Thread: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

  1. #1861
    free market communist
    Gardener's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    09-30-17 @ 12:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,661

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post

    Big 10

    That's just a little redundant, don't ya think?

    But I'm impressed, anyway.
    "you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos

  2. #1862
    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 Redress View Post
    You are making an assumption based on zero facts. His singular goal might have been to rule properly.
    True but considering his own sexual preference its not that much of a leap.

    Levels of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause

    Learn how the EPC works. Tell me where age and numbers fit on the list. Gender is under middle tier scrutiny. Further ask if restricting age in marriage might, like many other restrictions on age, meet some of those levels of scrutiny.
    You are only making my point for me Redress. Nowhere at any time before this ruling has gender been a reason to allow a group the "right" to marry. He is expanding the definition of the clause to include marriage based on gender. He NEVER mentions age in his ruling as a factor. His argument was gender.

    And age has been looked at. Age Discrimination in Employment Act is one of them.

    Bottom line as far as age is concerned "rationality" will play a major factor which could not be more subjective. The first 14 year old who wants to marry a 35 year old and can think and act like an adult will throw the rational argument against age based marriage for that couple into chaos.

    But lets put that aside for a bit. How do you justify discriminating against the number of people who claim they are being discriminated against using the gender argument? Assuming they are adults you can't fall back on the rational argument so how do you discriminate against them?
    Last edited by texmaster; 08-09-10 at 11:44 PM.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  3. #1863
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:57 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,198

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    True but considering his own sexual preference its not that much of a leap.



    You are only making my point for me Redress. Nowhere at any time before this ruling has gender been a reason to allow a group the "right" to marry. He is expanding the definition of the clause to include marriage based on gender. He NEVER mentions age in his ruling as a factor. His argument was gender.

    And age has been looked at. Age Discrimination in Employment Act is one of them.

    Bottom line as far as age is conscerned "rationality" will play a major factor which could not be more subjective. The first 14 year old who wants to marry a 35 year old and can think and act like an adult will throw the rational argument against marriage for that couple into choas.

    But lets put that aside for a bit. How do you justify descriminating against the number of people who claim they are being descriminated against using the gender argument? Assuming they are adults you can't fall back on the rational argument so how do you descriminate against them?
    14 year olds can't consent or enter into legal contracts.
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  4. #1864
    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 independent_thinker2002 View Post
    14 year olds can't consent or enter into legal contracts.
    Already disproven. 14 year olds can earn a paycheck and sign contracts. Ask the bag boy or bus boy at any local restaurant.
    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

    John Adams

  5. #1865
    Bus Driver to Hell
    Thorgasm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:57 PM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    68,198

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    Already disproven. 14 year olds can earn a paycheck and sign contracts. Ask the bag boy or bus boy at any local restaurant.
    They can be compensated for their services, sure. But they are not under contract. This is also with implied consent of the parents.
    Quote Originally Posted by faithful_servant View Post
    Being a psychiatric patient does not mean that you are mentally ill.



  6. #1866
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    True but considering his own sexual preference its not that much of a leap.



    You are only making my point for me Redress. Nowhere at any time before this ruling has gender been a reason to allow a group the "right" to marry. He is expanding the definition of the clause to include marriage based on gender. He NEVER mentions age in his ruling as a factor. His argument was gender.

    And age has been looked at. Age Discrimination in Employment Act is one of them.

    Bottom line as far as age is concerned "rationality" will play a major factor which could not be more subjective. The first 14 year old who wants to marry a 35 year old and can think and act like an adult will throw the rational argument against age based marriage for that couple into chaos.

    But lets put that aside for a bit. How do you justify discriminating against the number of people who claim they are being discriminated against using the gender argument? Assuming they are adults you can't fall back on the rational argument so how do you discriminate against them?
    Honestly tex are you even trying anymore? This is grasping at straws.

    1. Nobody is challenging any laws regarding age restrictions on marriage.
    2. Walker cited 80 findings of fact to support his ruling, and you haven't presented even one fact to support your age argument. (If you want to talk about being subjective)
    3. There is no grounds for people in regards to polygamy, pedophilia, or zoophilia to argue gender discrimination as a means for obtaining marriage for their situations.

    Now if you want to argue this whole new idea of getting rid of age restrictions on marriage, then I suggest you open up a new thread, because it has no bearing on this discussion. I look forward to you scrouging up 80 findings of fact to support your argument.

  7. #1867
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    05-06-12 @ 11:12 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    9,800

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Good op ed piece, might help some put the pieces together.

    How Jehovah's Witnesses helped kill Prop 8 - USATODAY.com

  8. #1868
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:14 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,328
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    True but considering his own sexual preference its not that much of a leap.
    By the same leap, if he was a christian, he may have rules based on that, if he was strait he may have been biased against gay marriage. You are just using assumptions to villainize some one your disagree with. He is biased because he might be biased.



    You are only making my point for me Redress. Nowhere at any time before this ruling has gender been a reason to allow a group the "right" to marry. He is expanding the definition of the clause to include marriage based on gender. He NEVER mentions age in his ruling as a factor. His argument was gender.

    And age has been looked at. Age Discrimination in Employment Act is one of them.

    Bottom line as far as age is concerned "rationality" will play a major factor which could not be more subjective. The first 14 year old who wants to marry a 35 year old and can think and act like an adult will throw the rational argument against age based marriage for that couple into chaos.

    But lets put that aside for a bit. How do you justify discriminating against the number of people who claim they are being discriminated against using the gender argument? Assuming they are adults you can't fall back on the rational argument so how do you discriminate against them?
    I think this is going way over your head. He rules on gender. He did not rule on age, not on numbers. His ruling is entirely irrelevant to age or numbers. You have yet to show one little bit in his ruling that would make it inevitable that it include underage marriage and pedophilia, let alone analyzed the entire ruling to show how it in it's whole would allow the things you claim.

    It's the same old tired red herrings. It is with the exact same lack of evidence to show the connection. The connection only exists in your head.
    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. #1869
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by BDBoop View Post
    Good op ed piece, might help some put the pieces together.

    How Jehovah's Witnesses helped kill Prop 8 - USATODAY.com
    Isn't that interesting.

    The majority, a short time back, wanted to ban religious freedom.
    It certainly tells us that the majority can be wrong and often.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  10. #1870
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    True but considering his own sexual preference its not that much of a leap.
    I just had to hop in here because I find this argument hilarious. The judge who was originally nominated by Ronald Reagan, who had his nomination defeated by Nancy Pelosi, who was finally confirmed by George Bush, who was challenged in his confirmation by almost every gay group in California because he represented the Olympics against the Gay Olympics, who is an avid libertarian conservative who has openly argued that government shouldn't be involved in marriage at all, etc. is influenced by his sexual orientation in this decision? I gotta give it to ya tex, that is the dumbest argument I have ever heard on this forum. Way to go!

Posting Permissions

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