Page 90 of 189 FirstFirst ... 40808889909192100140 ... LastLast
Results 891 to 900 of 1882

Thread: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

  1. #891
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    But they had civil unions no? Other than the label of "marry" what changes?
    Instead of same sex couples being offered a culutrally inferior and unfamiliar official relationship they are offered the dignitiy, respect, and stature inherent in marriage. It also means that California no longer has to recognize two "separate but equal" forms of legally recognized relationships.

  2. #892
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,739

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    zero to thirty one means nothing...

    LOL!
    Well, the German people overwhelmingly put the Nazis and Adolf Hitler in power. That didn't make them right either, did it?
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  3. #893
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,571

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Instead of same sex couples being offered a culutrally inferior and unfamiliar official relationship they are offered the dignitiy, respect, and stature inherent in marriage. It also means that California no longer has to recognize two "separate but equal" forms of legally recognized relationships.

    so there is no difference, if I am understanding you right, here than, emotional? Do you think the 7 million folks who had their will overturned will not magically accept these "marriages" as anything more than what they were before the ruling, by 1 man?

    Are you suggesting the government can mandate acceptance, mandate diginty, respect, etc?
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  4. #894
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Hopefully the right to marry the person they love and want to establish a monogamous relationship with.
    Well, marriage currently doesn't give anyone the right to marry the person they love. It gives them a right to marry a person of the opposite sex. If they love someone of the opposite sex that doesn't get married, they don't have the right to be married to that person. Additionally there's no requirement or need now necessarily to "love" the perosn you're marrying. There's not really a regularly enforced need for monogamy and marriage if a couple doesn't wish it.

  5. #895
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Reverend_Hellh0und View Post
    so there is no difference, if I am understanding you right, here than, emotional? Do you think the 7 million folks who had their will overturned will not magically accept these "marriages" as anything more than what they were before the ruling, by 1 man?

    Are you suggesting the government can mandate acceptance, mandate diginty, respect, etc?
    There's a difference of about 120 specific rights and privileges between marriage and domestic partnerships, which is all california offers.

  6. #896
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,571

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    There's a difference of about 120 specific rights and privileges between marriage and domestic partnerships, which is all california offers.



    Thanks..... I really didn't know. You know me, I don't care if someone wants to "marry a goat", it's none of my business.... Personally I think the government should be out of the marriage business.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  7. #897
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,971

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    The right to refer to ones coupling as marriage in a legal sense.

    Much the same as other issues in the past where they've tried to proclaim something is "seperate" but "equal".

    Having two seperate things called two seperate things that are similar in all other ways does not make them equal, it makes them similar.

    This is akin to saying "What right does a plack person miss out if he's forced to sit in a specific section of a resturant. Can he still go to the resturant? Can he still eat the food? Can he sill get a table? If its equal amount of distance from the door as a table on the "white" side does he still not have the same ease of access? So what's the "difference" there other than an emotional claim to wanting to be able to sit in the same places the whites can sit at?

  8. #898
    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 hazlnut View Post
    It's even funnier watching you bolt from a discussion that's over your head.

    You obviously lack a basic understanding of how state and fed courts function. These are not difficult concepts, the path is mostly linear in an upward direction -- hence the term, 'higher court'. Once a case or issue reaches the end of the road at the state level (state supreme court) AND if there is a legitimate civil rights or interstate commerce issue, then a plaintiff can seek remedy in a higher court -- the federal courts.

    Hope this helps.
    Making statements and refusing to back them up says much about the people that support this judge.

  9. #899
    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 CriticalThought View Post
    Dude, no offense, but you were the one who came into this thread and claimed that the issue hadn't gone before states courts before it was overturned by the federal court. You were the one making unsupported claims and then you demanded that people disprove your unsupported claims. The worst part is, common sense and a basic understanding of civics should have lead you to understand that this could not even be a federal case if it hadn't gone through the state courts. The reason you have been getting hammered in this thread is because you came in here uninformed on the issue of discussion and clearly uneducated on the structure of the court system.
    When people work so hard to avoid backing up statements it shws me who is not prepared

  10. #900
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:47 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,315
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: California gay marriage ban overturned: report

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    A question for everyone in here....

    For the liberals ---> Why have some of you, or in general many liberals, decried the rulings of judges in other states as wrong, unconstitutional, and erronious when they've ruled that such things ARE constitutional. Why did liberals by and large degrade such rulings, while simultaneously continually pointing to this going "See, see, a judge said so!" as some kind of proof that it is constitutional and that people should automatically accept it. More precisely, why do you think people should be held to a standard that liberals have not been holding to time, and time, and time again?

    For the conservatives ---> Conservatives generally pointed towards judges in the past making a ruling on the constitutionality of this as being "proof" that their position is right constitutionally. However, if you're basing the argument off a judges decision then how is this one different in its legitimacy. The statement "he's gay, he's biased" is no more reasonable than "the other judges were straight, and biased". Indeed, on what ground or basis do conservatives by and large deny their hypocrisy of going "see, see, a judge said it was constitutional so it is" to turn around and say "It doesn't matter what a judge says".

    Would it not be more appropriate, more apt, and less hypocritical on both sides to simply state that this result simply means its a step closer to the Surpreme Court and actually being decided rather than attempting every time one of these come out to say "SEE! This proves it! MY side is RIGHT because a JUDGE said so."?

    This judges ruling is no more important nationally or constitutionally than any of the judges before him, and theirs no more important than his. This proves nothing other than that THIS particular judge feels its unconstitutional. All this does, along with the others, is provide the possability of this making it to the Surpeme Court.

    As to the ruling, I'm unsure of my feelings in regards to due process though agree with it under equal protection but for reasons outside of what the gay movement pushes.

    With that said, I don't think this will help anyone and I think it getting pushed to the Supreme Court is going to continue this schism in the country and cause the isue to not die down anytime in the near future. I think this is the shoe horned approach, primarily because both sides have reached a point where they've entrenched themself so much that reasonable, rational, discussion and attempts at compromise in an intelligent way is almost beyond possible.
    Zyphlin, for me, I can disagree with a ruling without using rhetoric like "activist judge"(you won't see me make that claim) or "biased judge who should recuse"(another you won't see except in extreme cases). Further, I am looking at the result of rulings. I am not a lawyer, and the subtlety of the law is difficult for me. I find reading rulings to be a painful affair.

    I would point out that I have not called this the "right" decision, only that it is good news for our side. Maybe that is the difference in what you are talking about, and my position.

    Now back to trying to get caught up on this thread.
    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.

Posting Permissions

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