Page 10 of 36 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 356

Thread: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

  1. #91
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Do you have evidence that this is so? Is it intrinsic to suggest that this would be the case?


    Tim-
    Why wouldn't it? If the same is true for heterosexual marriage then why wouldn't it be true for SSM? There won't be accidental pregnancy's, but the incentives to have a baby is still there, and it would lead to more adoption, and use of alternative procreation methods. I'll look for numbers but there probably hard to find.

    Also I must say that heterosexual marriage isn't for the sole purpose of procreation, so your argument is rather weak. If it was then wouldn't infertile people be not allowed to married?

    Marriage is the best way to raise children, would you agree?
    So then allowing LGBT people to marry, it would allow more kids to be able to be raised in such an environment. Wouldn't that be a good thing for society?
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  2. #92
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Why wouldn't it? If the same is true for heterosexual marriage then why wouldn't it be true for SSM? There won't be accidental pregnancy's, but the incentives to have a baby is still there, and it would lead to more adoption, and use of alternative procreation methods. I'll look for numbers but there probably hard to find.

    Also I must say that heterosexual marriage isn't for the sole purpose of procreation, so your argument is rather weak. If it was then wouldn't infertile people be not allowed to married?

    Marriage is the best way to raise children, would you agree?
    So then allowing LGBT people to marry, it would allow more kids to be able to be raised in such an environment. Wouldn't that be a good thing for society?
    Ah, but Your Star, you're not paying attention.. The exception is wherein lies the vested interest. That's the whole point. The fact that you missed it is not at al unpredictable.

    Gays having children is both, not instrinsic to human society, nor is it pressumed. Fail, on both parts.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  3. #93
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 03:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Few posts back.. I answered a question posed by the judge; Walker, that asked why the state had a vesting interest in heterosexual marriage, that is not the same for homosexual marriage.


    Tim-
    Sorry, I read that and I didn't see any legal arguments.

    There was, it seemed, an assumption that marriage was about procreation. I suppose that there is an assumption that people having kids is good for the state? However, this would argue that, if a pair is incapable of having children, then they should not be granted the right to wed, regardless of whether is was a mixed sex marriage. No such prohibition exists. There should also be some requirement that a marriage that does not produce children should be disolved because it has not served its intended goal, kids.

    Putting asside your "pleading" for a minute, it seems to me that this is not about breeding, it is about pairing. We grant married couple rights under the law that have nothing to do with procreation. Some (deductions for dependents) are available to people who have children. Those benefits are available no matter how that dependent was obtained -- birth or adoption. I think that it is a fine thing for government to give special rights to couples. I don't think that it right for the government to decide how the couple is formed. Should the government not recognize the pairing of couples of differnt race, height, weight, IQ, eye color, etc. What is sepecial about gender pairing? Technology makes it so that impregnation no longer requires the insertion of a penis into a vagina, so if kids are the point, no need for a man and woman to lie down together and f--k. Just go to Walmart and buy some sperm.

    Let peole pair how they want.

  4. #94
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    YS
    Also I must say that heterosexual marriage isn't for the sole purpose of procreation, so your argument is rather weak

    Then why should the state have any interest at all? This should be interesting?


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  5. #95
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by zip98053 View Post
    Sorry, I read that and I didn't see any legal arguments.

    There was, it seemed, an assumption that marriage was about procreation. I suppose that there is an assumption that people having kids is good for the state? However, this would argue that, if a pair is incapable of having children, then they should not be granted the right to wed, regardless of whether is was a mixed sex marriage. No such prohibition exists. There should also be some requirement that a marriage that does not produce children should be disolved because it has not served its intended goal, kids.

    Putting asside your "pleading" for a minute, it seems to me that this is not about breeding, it is about pairing. We grant married couple rights under the law that have nothing to do with procreation. Some (deductions for dependents) are available to people who have children. Those benefits are available no matter how that dependent was obtained -- birth or adoption. I think that it is a fine thing for government to give special rights to couples. I don't think that it right for the government to decide how the couple is formed. Should the government not recognize the pairing of couples of differnt race, height, weight, IQ, eye color, etc. What is sepecial about gender pairing? Technology makes it so that impregnation no longer requires the insertion of a penis into a vagina, so if kids are the point, no need for a man and woman to lie down together and f--k. Just go to Walmart and buy some sperm.

    Let peole pair how they want.
    It's not assumption so much as it is a pressumption. One is diredted by law, the other is not.

    My argument is legal in nature not philosophical, as your is? Why is there an instrinsic pressumption that gays will procreate?


    Tim-
    Last edited by Hicup; 08-17-10 at 02:50 AM. Reason: Adding
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  6. #96
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Ah, but Your Star, you're not paying attention.. The exception is wherein lies the vested interest. That's the whole point. The fact that you missed it is not at al unpredictable.

    Gays having children is both, not instrinsic to human society, nor is it pressumed. Fail, on both parts.


    Tim-
    Why wouldn't it be presumed? Gays still have children now without marriage, and with the incentives of marriage why wouldn't that number go up? Also putting more children into married households would be a good thing, and allowing SSM marriage would do that.
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  7. #97
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Why wouldn't it be presumed? Gays still have children now without marriage, and with the incentives of marriage why wouldn't that number go up? Also putting more children into married households would be a good thing, and allowing SSM marriage would do that.
    They have children, but they are not pressumed to have a wanting of children. Do I have to spell this out to you?


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  8. #98
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 03:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    But gays are separate, and unequal in terms of a vested state interest. I know that makes some people that are unable to think deeply, very ill, but it is the truth.


    Tim-
    What is the vested state interest that is not served by allowing a pair of people to form a financial pairing that gives them benefits that would otherwise not be available to them?

    If you can, please try to avoid the pretentious pejoratives about relative mental capabilities.

  9. #99
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    They have children, but they are not pressumed to have a wanting of children. Do I have to spell this out to you?


    Tim-
    Why? Just because one is homosexual it doesn't mean that they don't have a desire to have children. If they didn't hardly any LGBT person would be parents.
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  10. #100
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Court halts Calif. gay marriages pending appeal

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Why? Just because one is homosexual it doesn't mean that they don't have a desire to have children. If they didn't hardly any LGBT person would be parents.
    Do you understand what instrinsic means?

    Definition:

    1. basic and essential: belonging to something as one of the basic and essential features that make it what it is
    an intrinsic part of the plan


    2. of itself: by or in itself, rather than because of its associations or consequences
    has no intrinsic value


    3. anatomy found in body part: occurring wholly within or belonging wholly to a part of the body such as an organ

    Um, I hope that helps you out a little.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

Page 10 of 36 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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