Page 81 of 94 FirstFirst ... 3171798081828391 ... LastLast
Results 801 to 810 of 939

Thread: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

  1. #801
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Thats a real stretch. By that logic...."Conservatives" would be for eliminating marriage all together....and I don't hear many advocating that.
    Eliminating marriage = no government. We advocate small government, not no government, and yes I would like ruffly half of all marriages to not occur in the first place as they just end in divorce.

  2. #802
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Well, the first thing you need to get right is that the government isn't the approving agency for a private contract.

    The government is the issuing authority and a signing party on a public license.

    You aren't taking a private agreement to a public notary, you're asking the government for special privileges.

    A couple of several items any couple looses when they get married are the right to contract, as you can't have more than one spouse, and the right to freely associate, as adultery is grounds to sue for damages.

    If you're not married, then legally you can do whatever the hell you want. Marriage places a whole host of restrictions on you.
    That sounds like an advocation for changing rules regarding marriages rather than denying marriage to a specific group. Plus, since those people in marriages are opting for such things as the chance of being sued for adultery or agreeing to enter into only one of such contract at a time, then it is in fact the choice of those people.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  3. #803
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    That sounds like an advocation for changing rules regarding marriages rather than denying marriage to a specific group. Plus, since those people in marriages are opting for such things as the chance of being sued for adultery or agreeing to enter into only one of such contract at a time, then it is in fact the choice of those people.
    I'm not challenging that it's their choice, I'm pointing out that it's an expansion of government, even if the expansion is wanted.

  4. #804
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I'm not challenging that it's their choice, I'm pointing out that it's an expansion of government, even if the expansion is wanted.
    Actually, you originally said that it was an expansion of government regulation, but that wouldn't be true because there is no increase in rules that the government is making. The rules are already in place. There will potentially be more people under those rules regarding marriage (although I have heard some arguments against this from the anti-SSM side), but there is no real increase in the actual regulations themselves. It would be like more people being allowed to open up small businesses. There would certainly be more small business licenses issued, but this would not mean that there would now be an actual increase in the regulation of small businesses.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  5. #805
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Actually, you originally said that it was an expansion of government regulation, but that wouldn't be true because there is no increase in rules that the government is making. The rules are already in place. There will potentially be more people under those rules regarding marriage (although I have heard some arguments against this from the anti-SSM side), but there is no real increase in the actual regulations themselves. It would be like more people being allowed to open up small businesses. There would certainly be more small business licenses issued, but this would not mean that there would now be an actual increase in the regulation of small businesses.
    Actually, what I originally said was:
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    In the pursuit of small government, one is required to oppose SSM, as SSM is the expansion of government; unconstitutionally so when children are not present.
    While I agree that increasing the number of regulations is expansion, so is increasing the number of people under the existing rule's influence expansion.

    So, you're invited to change your argument and claim that SSM is a reduction in government as all it would do is erase a disqualifying coupling. If you do, however, you will need to show why other disqualifiers shouldn't also be erased for the same reason; that is, what distinguishes SSM from everything else on the list.

  6. #806
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Actually, what I originally said was:


    While I agree that increasing the number of regulations is expansion, so is increasing the number of people under the existing rule's influence expansion.

    So, you're invited to change your argument and claim that SSM is a reduction in government as all it would do is erase a disqualifying coupling. If you do, however, you will need to show why other disqualifiers shouldn't also be erased for the same reason; that is, what distinguishes SSM from everything else on the list.
    Actually I have said all along that we should look at the various things that do disqualify people from being married and determine we don't allow them. As long as they still ensure the main point of why the government would want to encourage/be involved in marriage at all, which is stability, then I don't really have much of an issue with them.

    I have said that the current marriage will not work for polygamists. It just can't. But with some minor adjustments, we could make a separate set of marriage laws for those seeking multiple marriages. It would be the responsibility of those who are seeking polygamy to argue their side and provide reasonable solutions to the problems that people bring up concerning their marriages.

    And it is not needed, for the most part, and has a couple of issues that need to be addressed if it is given to blood relatives, such as siblings or children/parent relationships, whether the relationship is sexual or not. The issues would be different for whether the relationship is sexual or strictly platonic. If it is sexual, then you are increasing the risk of certain learning disorders and genetic defects, but more importantly, it must be asked when the relationship started to form. Many of such relationships formed prior to at least one of the two participants being of consenting age and involves authoritative influence. If the relationship is simply for convenience, then you reach the issue that the marriage is really not doing a lot to promote stability, since it is likely that the couple will not stay together their lifetime. You also have the issue that it is wrong to invade the privacy of the couple but there is no way to ensure otherwise that the relationship is strictly platonic. A better arrangement for platonic family relationships that want more protection would be to offer some other contract. I would not advocate calling it marriage since the word "marriage" does imply intimacy, but wouldn't really care one way or another. I really don't see a big outcry for siblings or parent/child marriages being legal, so I say we wait til we have such a group who is able to reasonably argue their side and what they want.

    The gay marriage advocates have already given their side, including arguments and implementation that is completely reasonable in how to implement SSM. It is up to the advocates of those other groups to present their own arguments. No one says that SSM should come just because it is the fair thing to do. There are plenty of reasons to allow SSM. There are no reasonable arguments, when it is compared to the exact way that OSM is currently available, to deny SSM.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  7. #807
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Actually I have said all along that we should look at the various things that do disqualify people from being married and determine we don't allow them. As long as they still ensure the main point of why the government would want to encourage/be involved in marriage at all, which is stability, then I don't really have much of an issue with them.

    I have said that the current marriage will not work for polygamists. It just can't. But with some minor adjustments, we could make a separate set of marriage laws for those seeking multiple marriages. It would be the responsibility of those who are seeking polygamy to argue their side and provide reasonable solutions to the problems that people bring up concerning their marriages.

    And it is not needed, for the most part, and has a couple of issues that need to be addressed if it is given to blood relatives, such as siblings or children/parent relationships, whether the relationship is sexual or not. The issues would be different for whether the relationship is sexual or strictly platonic. If it is sexual, then you are increasing the risk of certain learning disorders and genetic defects, but more importantly, it must be asked when the relationship started to form. Many of such relationships formed prior to at least one of the two participants being of consenting age and involves authoritative influence. If the relationship is simply for convenience, then you reach the issue that the marriage is really not doing a lot to promote stability, since it is likely that the couple will not stay together their lifetime. You also have the issue that it is wrong to invade the privacy of the couple but there is no way to ensure otherwise that the relationship is strictly platonic. A better arrangement for platonic family relationships that want more protection would be to offer some other contract. I would not advocate calling it marriage since the word "marriage" does imply intimacy, but wouldn't really care one way or another. I really don't see a big outcry for siblings or parent/child marriages being legal, so I say we wait til we have such a group who is able to reasonably argue their side and what they want.

    The gay marriage advocates have already given their side, including arguments and implementation that is completely reasonable in how to implement SSM. It is up to the advocates of those other groups to present their own arguments. No one says that SSM should come just because it is the fair thing to do. There are plenty of reasons to allow SSM. There are no reasonable arguments, when it is compared to the exact way that OSM is currently available, to deny SSM.
    If you've never heard pro-SSM cry discrimination then you have no exposure to the topic.

    The problem with SSM is that there are no arguments unique to it. Every reason to allow SSM can be applied to other unions which those very advocates oppose, thus nullifying their own position.

    When a group invokes the 14th, and wishes for other groups to be left out, just as pro-SSM does, then they need to distinguish themselves from those other groups.

  8. #808
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I'm not challenging that it's their choice, I'm pointing out that it's an expansion of government, even if the expansion is wanted.
    You are, perhaps, the only person who I think I have ever heard that has tried to argue that government limiting rights to certain groups is actually LESS government.

    I have to hand it to you for your creativity.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  9. #809
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    You are, perhaps, the only person who I think I have ever heard that has tried to argue that government limiting rights to certain groups is actually LESS government.

    I have to hand it to you for your creativity.
    The right to marry the same sex doesn't exist for gays to point to another group and say "they can do it why can't we".

  10. #810
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,144

    Re: Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    The right to marry the same sex doesn't exist for gays to point to another group and say "they can do it why can't we".
    what exactly is the point that you are attempting to make here?
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

Page 81 of 94 FirstFirst ... 3171798081828391 ... 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
  •