Page 84 of 94 FirstFirst ... 34748283848586 ... LastLast
Results 831 to 840 of 939

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

  1. #831
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Everyone has the right to marry the opposite sex, while no one has the right to marry the same sex. I think you framed that correctly.
    However, when we look at other situations of the EPC this type of rationalization doesn't work. "Everyone has the right to marry the same race, but no one has the right to marry another race" is unconstitutional. equally unconstitutional would be mandating that everyone has the right to marry someone not of their race, but no one has the right to marry someone of their race.

    Men are able to marry women, women can't. Women are able to marry men, men can't. Each sex is able to do something the other cannot do under the law.

    Because you are the same sex of that individual.
    Your point?

    If you don't love them, then when you recite your vows in the solemnization process you are committing fraud on the other person and they can sue you accordingly.
    Wedding vows are not required to engage in marriage. Nor, technically, is love an absolute requirement under the law.

    Right, it's gender discrimination, and that's ok. Perfectly acceptable.
    Actually its not. Sex is a middle teir protected entity under the EPC. The "acceptability" of discriminating based on it with regards to marriage is a bit up in the air and is far from "perfectly" acecptable. At most its questionably acceptable.

    Anti-incest is familial discrimination
    Lowest tier of the EPC, not comparable with sex.

    anti-polygamy is marital-status/religious discrimination.
    Lowest tier of the EPC with regards to marital status, thus not comparable with sex. Religious discrimination would only come into play if private polygamous marriages were punishable by law. The law is not constitutionally required to change to allow something to become legal simply because your religion says so...IE you can't claim religious discrimination for murdering someone because your religion says its okay. Religious discrimination under the EPC is if the goverment is discriminating specifically against you due to your religion which would not be the case here.

    So what? So you're being discriminated against....who cares.
    That pesky thing called the constitutional potentially cares.

  2. #832
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,133

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    As I keep saying to you, and which you refuse to listen, I am not arguing that I have a right to same sex marriage. I am arguing that I have a right to choose who I marry and the government has no right to limit that freedom on the basis of my sex.

    I'm defending my right to choose who I marry, not defending a right to marry the same sex.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 03-21-11 at 04:48 PM.

  3. #833
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    I have a right to marry the person that I choose.
    You don't have that right at all. No one has the right to simply marry the person they choose, period, end of discussion. There are numerous, legitimate, unquestionably constitutional restrictions placed on marriage.

  4. #834
    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 Zyphlin View Post

    However, when we look at other situations of the EPC this type of rationalization doesn't work. "Everyone has the right to marry the same race, but no one has the right to marry another race" is unconstitutional. equally unconstitutional would be mandating that everyone has the right to marry someone not of their race, but no one has the right to marry someone of their race.
    It didn't work in Loving because other races could marry whites. Only blacks were barred.

    That doesn't apply here as we only have 2 sexes, whereas we have a plethora of races.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Men are able to marry women, women can't. Women are able to marry men, men can't. Each sex is able to do something the other cannot do under the law.
    Each sex can marry the opposite sex, neither sex can marry the same sex.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Wedding vows are not required to engage in marriage. Nor, technically, is love an absolute requirement under the law.
    Wedding vows are required as they fulfill the solemnization process required under the law.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Lowest tier of the EPC with regards to marital status, thus not comparable with sex. Religious discrimination would only come into play if private polygamous marriages were punishable by law. The law is not constitutionally required to change to allow something to become legal simply because your religion says so...
    Polygamy IS punished in SD, and the law doesn't have to change just because your dick says so.

  5. #835
    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 CriticalThought View Post
    As I keep saying to you, and which you refuse to listen, I am not arguing that I have a right to same sex marriage. I am arguing that I have a right to choose who I marry and the government has no right to limit that freedom on the basis of my sex.

    I'm defending my right to choose who I marry, not defending a right to marry the same sex.
    You don't have that right. You never did. Just like I never had the right to own missiles or WMDs. You want to get married? You have the right to marry any qualified person, just like you can own any qualified firearm.

    You can't marry a man, own a grenade, marry a child, or carry a Stinger missile around.
    Last edited by Jerry; 03-21-11 at 05:06 PM.

  6. #836
    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 CriticalThought View Post
    Oh really?

    Exactly why does the government, solely on the basis of my sex, have the right to limit who I choose to marry?
    Here's exactly why:

    On the federal level, the United States Supreme Court has struck down laws that have unconstitutionally targeted gays and lesbians for disparate treatment. Although plaintiffs rely on the federal cases to support the argument that they have a fundamental right to marry under our State Constitution, those cases fall far short of establishing a fundamental right to same-sex marriage "deeply rooted in the traditions, history, and conscience of the people of this State."
    a-68-05.doc.html

  7. #837
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    It didn't work in Loving because other races could marry whites. Only blacks were barred.

    That doesn't apply here as we only have 2 sexes, whereas we have a plethora of races.

    Each sex can marry the opposite sex, neither sex can marry the same sex.
    I don't discount that it is a legitimate argument. It is by far not an argument that you can use to say its "perfectly" acceptable constitutionally because its predicated completley off assumption. No where in those arguments are you going to find discussion by the judges stating that if they had restricted all other races, not just blacks, from marrying whites that it'd have been constitutional. I ask you again, do you believe it would be constitutional to require individuals of a particular race to have to marry someone only of their race, and require that of every race? The fact there is only two in this case doesn't change the fact that an argument can be made that a man and a woman can do something the other can't. You may disagree with that argument, you may find a semantical way to say the argument should really be stated a different way, but your explanation of what is happening is absolutely zero percent more valid than mine.

    Which is why claiming it as an unquestionable fact is beyond ridiculous and simply constitutionally ignorant.

    Wedding vows are required as they fulfill the solemnization process required under the law.
    You got a link showing it? Perhaps in your state? In Virginia I know there is no such law nor requirement. I also know in most states you could make your own vows and I am unaware of any stating the created vows must assert love as a component of it.

    Polygamy IS punished in SD, and the law doesn't have to change just because your dick says so.
    Wonderful. I think its a ridiculous and potentially unconstitutional law then with regards to individuals engaging in a private joining with absolutely no affect on the law. That said, its rather irrelevant to the point of this thread.

  8. #838
    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 Zyphlin View Post
    I don't discount that it is a legitimate argument. It is by far not an argument that you can use to say its "perfectly" acceptable constitutionally because its predicated completley off assumption. No where in those arguments are you going to find discussion by the judges stating that if they had restricted all other races, not just blacks, from marrying whites that it'd have been constitutional.
    I offer it in reaction, as a counter point or clarification, not as a stand alone argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I ask you again, do you believe it would be constitutional to require individuals of a particular race to have to marry someone only of their race, and require that of every race?
    My objections to interracial marriage are fact-dependent on the dynamics unique to interracial marriage and do not carry over to other types of unions. While I don't argue for a ban of interracial marriage, I strongly advocate mandatory comprehensive pre-marital counseling, as unresolvable cultural differences are what places mixed-marriage in a high-rick-of-divorce state. Also, mixed unions can produce a few medical problems in children which the parents need to be aware of and prepared for. Once the state can certify that the couple does in fact have all the information to truly make an informed choice, then the state shall issue the license.

    I would support the state in denying mixed couples a marriage license if they refused such pre-marital counseling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    The fact there is only two in this case doesn't change the fact that an argument can be made that a man and a woman can do something the other can't.
    Both are under the same restrictions, both have the same liberty. This is proven where SSM is legalized, as the ability to marry the same sex is not conferred only on one group or another, but on everyone. It's something no one could do before, which was not the case with interracial marriage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    You got a link showing it? Perhaps in your state? In Virginia I know there is no such law nor requirement. I also know in most states you could make your own vows and I am unaware of any stating the created vows must assert love as a component of it.
    South Dakota Codified Laws
    25-1-1. Marriage defined--Consent and solemnization required. Marriage is a personal relation, between a man and a woman, arising out of a civil contract to which the consent of parties capable of making it is necessary. Consent alone does not constitute a marriage; it must be followed by a solemnization.
    25-1-24. Time allowed after license for solemnization of marriage. Marriage licenses issued under the provisions of this chapter shall become void and of no effect unless the marriage be solemnized within twenty days following the issuance thereof.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Wonderful. I think its a ridiculous and potentially unconstitutional law then with regards to individuals engaging in a private joining with absolutely no affect on the law. That said, its rather irrelevant to the point of this thread.
    When someone mentions polygamy everyone's knee-jerk reaction is to think of some Mormon compound were some cultist is abusing children.

    I'm here to tell ya that the Native Americans haven't quite parted with their tradition of polygamy, and I'm sure it's something Muslims would like the freedom to do here as well.
    Last edited by Jerry; 03-21-11 at 06:03 PM.

  9. #839
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,133

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    You don't have that right. You never did. Just like I never had the right to own missiles or WMDs. You want to get married? You have the right to marry any qualified person, just like you can own any qualified firearm.
    So there are "qualified" people you can marry?

    You are definitely no small government conservative Jerry. You are advocating for government intrusion into personal lives.

    The fact is that the Supreme Court of the United States established that marriage is a fundamental right and the state has no grounds to dictate who you can and cannot marry without a legitimate basis for doing so.

    Repeatedly posting a ruling from a state Supreme Court is not going to change that fact.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 03-21-11 at 06:04 PM.

  10. #840
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,133

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I would support the state in denying mixed couples a marriage license if they refused such pre-marital counseling.
    That is about as socailly conservative as you can get.

Page 84 of 94 FirstFirst ... 34748283848586 ... 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
  •