Page 37 of 189 FirstFirst ... 2735363738394787137 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 1882

Thread: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

  1. #361
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,951

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    That's because your views and beliefs violate the rights of others.
    They also violate the "rights" of bestiality and pedophiles. I don't think the right to marry a horse or marry a child is right either.
    No it wasn't, you got to vote. You just can't make law that which infringes upon the rights of others.
    They were voting to define a right though. Your opinion that homosexual unions is a right is just as valid as mine, which believes that it isn't marriage and thus doesn't have the right to be called such.
    That's because your beliefs were illegal. You cannot infringe upon the rights of others. You were free to vote for it, and you did. But since we are not a direct democracy (for the love of all that is holy, how is this a hard concept to understand?), we have system of checks and balances to ensure the rights of the minority are upheld.
    They are legal, my state has defined marriage, and they were found to be illegal when brought to court by the ACLU. My beliefs are legal. We aren't a direct democracy at the federal level. At the state level things are different, and the rules for voting on Prop 8 was that the majority vote would be put into law.
    For the love of ****, no it was not. Go out onto the street corner and start preaching against same sex marriage. Dollars to donuts says you don't get arrested.
    It soon will be if "hate speech" legislation is passed just like Canada. My voicing my beliefs I was talking about voicing them through my vote.
    Because WE ARE NOT A DIRECT DEMOCRACY. Jesus tap dancing Christ on a pogo stick. We are a Constitutional Republic built upon the rights and liberties of the individual. We protect those rights, we ensure those rights. Majority rules within minority rights. That's how it is. And not contractual slavery, nice attempt to try to deflect there. Forced slavery is also not outside your "logic" here. If the majority of the people in a State said "Black people suck and we should make them slaves again!" Do you really think they should be allowed to? Well according to EVERYTHING you've said in this thread, yes. But it's an insane position to take.
    See above. As a Constitutional Republic the state's have rights. Please tell me about the voting rules in California and how being a Constitutional Republic means that in Porp 8's case, that the majority vote should not become law. The voting rules were that the majority vote would be put into place. It wasn't to be represented by districts in California with electoral votes that would determine things. Again, if the majority of people in the state wanted slavery, they would have to amend the constitution or secede from the US. The Constitution was amended to make slavery illegal. In order to re-instate it they would have to repeal that amendment. However, there is no amendment that says gay marriage should be legalized, and many other states have defined marriage without it being ruled unconstitutional.

    But the 9th amendment isn't. And by your actions you're trying to infringe upon an individual's right to contract since marriage is a State issued and recognized contract.
    Do you realize what you just said? Marriage is a state issued and recognized contract. And the state of California asked the citizens of the state to define the boundaries of that contract.
    Government is inherently amoral. And nothing that the court did here "enforces morality". The enforcement of morality comes from the other side. The side trying to infringe upon the rights of others to enter into contract. That's where morality is being enforced. Now, if the law said you can only get gay married, then you'd have a point. But since it didn't, you don't.
    The other side wants to define homosexual unions of marriage yet not include child marriages, bestiality, and pansexual marriages. It is an enforcement of morality in that it equates homosexuality with heterosexuality yet puts other sexualities as immoral and not legally marriage.
    WTF are you even talking about now? All people have right to contract, that's that. Marriage is a contract. That's the end all be all of this argument. One side (yours) wishes to infringe upon that right. The other side wishes to acknowledge that right.
    No, we wish to define the legal boundaries of that contract just as the other side desires to do. Two moral stances are butting heads when it comes to defining the contract of marriage.
    Because marriage is a contract. The Marriage License is a State issued and recognized contract. The government isn't legislating morals. That's is a dumb, retarded, and tired argument. The courts here are merely looking to acknowledge the EQUAL right. No where are your rights infringed upon. No where does it say you have to like it. No where does it say you can't condemn it. But so long as the marriage license exists as a contract, you cannot infringe upon other's right to contract.
    The court here wants to trample on people's votes and force a moral stance that homosexual unions are the same legally as heterosexual unions. Why can they infringe upon someone's "right" to marry a cat, or a spoon, or a child? Why aren't those things rights? What would your position be if people wanted to marry their loyal dogs and pets and states no one has the right to tell them their union is illegal or wrong?
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  2. #362
    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 ptif219 View Post
    So 7% of the people have authority over the rest of the country?
    No it's 0% of the people should have authority over 0% of people.
    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

  3. #363
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    They are once one tries to use government force to enforce them. Such as creation of laws, which is what this thread is about. So please, stay on target.
    beliefs are illegal once one tries to use the force of govt to enforce them, such as the creation of laws?

    illegal?

    because of the creation of laws?

    to enforce all those indecent, illegal beliefs?

    ah, i see...

    LOL!

  4. #364
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,356

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Digsbe, you say your beliefs aren't being treated equally under the law. And they aren't, you know why? Because they infringe upon the rights of others, thats why. It's not that hard to understand, stop thinking with your religion, and start thinking with your brain. White supremacy isn't equal under the law, neither is ant-semitism, nor any other believe system that infringes upon the rights of others. Deal with, it's called living in America, don't like then move.
    Last edited by Your Star; 08-04-10 at 09:37 PM.
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  5. #365
    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 digsbe
    My point is that homosexuals do flaunt their "pride" and force people to accept them by trouncing around in whatever they wear and calling everyone "haters" who don't support them.
    Man I have Christians come to my home, regularly, waking me up (I work at night) in an attempt to convert me.

    I do not have gay people doing the same.
    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

  6. #366
    User
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    10-25-11 @ 08:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    116

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Does the equal protection clause extend to sexual orientation and to force everyone to accept any orientation as legal? What about the rights of pansexuals? Why can't someone marry their kitchen stove? Among all the traditionally immoral sexualities, why does homosexuality have a special privilege? And yes, deny it all you want, but my right to vote and have my beliefs as law have been stripped from me in California when it comes to defining marriage. Don't be blind to it.

    Strawman duly noted. Ignoring now. There are people who want to regulate speech in churches where they can't call homosexuality a sin.

    I see that you find these displays to be disgusting too. My point is that homosexuals do flaunt their "pride" and force people to accept them by trouncing around in whatever they wear and calling everyone "haters" who don't support them.


    I don't care if gays kiss in public or state in the paper that they are "married."

    I'm actually fine with homosexuals voicing their beliefs and voting, along with those who support the homosexual union. I think it's great that they can voice their opinions and make them law. Just like it's great to have people of the opposing view standing up for what they believe and voting... oh wait, in California only pro-gay people have a right to any say on the issue. To be honest, my ass is quite happy that people can democratically vote. You can stop making fun of my religion if you want to. It's irrelevant to the debate to make fun of Christians.

    Um, yes they are. The judge just ruled that it's illegal for people to vote against gay marriage, and that it's illegal to have that view represented in the state. You're to smart and logical to be blind to this fact. Why can social liberals impose their beliefs upon others? Why is that ok? Why can they force their definition of marriage upon the majority who legally and democratically voted against it?

    Homosexual unions aren't a right though. What right is being limited? The only right limited is people's right to vote and have their opinions put into law.

    They did that in TN too, and the judge correctly ruled that my state has the right to define marriage. We voted, and passed Amendment 1 to legally define marriage.

    My rights are being curbed, in that my right to vote has been infringed upon by the judge who ruled the very voicing of my opinion on a ballot to be illegal. California stripped me of my rights and the right to vote on an issue that was presented before Californians. What is the logic behind the judge making prop 8 illegal?
    I was merely exposing you to the truth that yes, Christians are persecuted and those of us who believe homosexuality is wrong get a damn beating for it. Again, attack my religion all you want.[/QUOTE]

    No, you aren't being persecuted. No one is forcing you to marry someone of the same sex. If you whine and cry when another group might get the same legal privilege as your group and you haven't lost a God damn thing in the process, then yes, you probably deserve the beating. It's selfish and bigoted. Your right to vote has not been infringed upon, the legal process worked exactly as it should. If you vote for a proposition that is contrary to the constitution or in contradictory to other laws, it is your own fault for failing to understand that what you were voting for should not have made the ballot. According to the judge, you did not have the right to deny another group of people a legal privilege you freely enjoy. You did not have the right to make that decision in the first place, so no rights were infringed upon.

  7. #367
    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 The Prof View Post
    beliefs are illegal once one tries to use the force of govt to enforce them, such as the creation of laws?

    illegal?

    because of the creation of laws?

    to enforce all those indecent, illegal beliefs?

    ah, i see...

    LOL!
    Come on guy, try to be reasonable here. It wasn't the best worded sentence, but context tells you everything you need to know. Beliefs which act against the rights and liberties of the individual cannot be put into law because of the effect that they have on the free practice of an individual's rights. When those beliefs are pushed towards laws, the laws are illegal as they violate the rights and liberties of others and can be challenged in court; as was the case here. You cannot use government force to enforce your personal beliefs if through the enforcement of those beliefs you infringe upon the rights and liberties of the individual.

    Seriously, I'm not asking much here; just try to be reasonable and consider the context.
    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."

  8. #368
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    And typically won through a super majority, not simple majority. They also must abide by the rights and liberties of the Constitution such as those in the BoR (including the 9th amendment). So while the people of a State can amend their constitution, the State constitution must be inline with the rights and liberties of the individual. Even State amendments can be struck down as unconstitutional.
    You mean the State constitution because we found out last week AZ can not enforce federal law only feds can

  9. #369
    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

    /me does Happy Snoopy Dance

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post

  10. #370
    Sage
    soccerboy22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    A warm place
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    10,723

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Man I have Christians come to my home, regularly, waking me up (I work at night) in an attempt to convert me.

    I do not have gay people doing the same.
    Show up naked and they stop coming.

    As for the issue itself, I understand the fact the voters voted for the amendment, but in my opinion they were wrong to do so. The will of the majority cannot be enforced on the minority. I just don't see why straight people don't want gays to be equally as miserable in marriage.

Posting Permissions

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