Page 65 of 123 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775115 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 1229

Thread: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

  1. #641
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,309

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Are you claiming that even the liberal justices on the supreme court are wrong?
    I'm still waiting for a link. you seem to have problems substantiating any of your claims. Imagine that?

  2. #642
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,961
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by marywollstonecraft View Post
    the right to choose who you marry is a human right
    The right to choose whom you marry.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  3. #643
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    I'm still waiting for a link. you seem to have problems substantiating any of your claims. Imagine that?
    Did you listen to the oral arguments?

    Here's the full transcript of the oral arguments

    http://www.afer.org/wp-content/uploa...l-Argument.pdf

    Specifically read the exchanges with Sotomayor, Kagan, and Kennedy

    I think there's substance to the point that sociological information is new,” he said. “We have five years of information to weigh against 2,000 years of history or more. - Anthony Kennedy
    The problem — the problem with the case is that you're really asking, particularly because of the sociological evidence you cite, for us to go into uncharted waters, and you can play with that metaphor, there's a wonderful destination, it is a cliff. - Anthony Kennedy
    I'm not sure, counsel, that it makes -- I'm not sure that it's right to view this as excluding a particular group. When the institution of marriage developed historically, people didn't get around and say let's have this institution, but let's keep out homosexuals. The institution developed to serve purposes that, by their nature, didn't include homosexual couples. - Roberts
    Outside of the marriage context(even Sotomayor is not arguing that marriage means something other than man + woman and talking about Nero and Spirit Brothers absurdity), can you think of any other rational basis, reason, for a state using sexual orientation as a factor in denying homosexuals benefits or imposing burdens on them? Is there any other rational decision-making that the government could make? Denying them a job, not granting them benefits of some sort, any other decision?
    The definition of what marriage has always been is acknowledged by ALL Justices throughout the entire discussion. Even Kagan and Sotomayor question from a perspective that people's rights are being denied. Not that Marriage has ever meant anything other than man + woman. It's radically extreme to claim marriage has ever meant anything other than man + woman.

    So can you finally get around to directly answering me questions now? Thanks

  4. #644
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,309

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Did you listen to the oral arguments?

    Here's the full transcript of the oral arguments

    http://www.afer.org/wp-content/uploa...l-Argument.pdf

    Specifically read the exchanges with Sotomayor, Kagan, and Kennedy









    The definition of what marriage has always been is acknowledged by ALL Justices throughout the entire discussion. Even Kagan and Sotomayor question from a perspective that people's rights are being denied. Not that Marriage has ever meant anything other than man + woman. It's radically extreme to claim marriage has ever meant anything other than man + woman.

    So can you finally get around to directly answering me questions now? Thanks
    You offer that as some sort of proof that all of mankind thinks the same way? Seriously/ Meanwhile I linked several countries where marriage includes same sex couples by definition and by law?

  5. #645
    He's the most tip top
    Top Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,309

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    That line of questioning is not unusual at all. If you can't handle what happens in Supreme Court hearings, maybe you shouldn't read them.
    Well lookey here. The resident right wing extremist pipes in with his typical defense of all things intolerant. Thanks for playing.

  6. #646
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    You offer that as some sort of proof that all of mankind thinks the same way? Seriously/ Meanwhile I linked several countries where marriage includes same sex couples by definition and by law?
    You didn't even make the effort to read the transcript. Whenever your emotions become threatened with logic and reason, you try and shift the discussion in a different direction. That won't work. Marriage has never been defined as man + ? or woman + ? throughout history. Any definition other than man + woman has never been the norm. Ever. Even the liberal justices on the Supreme Court acknowledged this. If you disagree with even the liberal justices on the supreme court in regards to this, that simply isn't my problem. It's yours.

    Mr. Olson, the bottom line that you're being asked -- and -- and it is one that I'm interested in the answer: If you say that marriage is a fundamental right, what State restrictions could ever exist? Meaning, what State restrictions with respect to the number of people, with respect to -- that could get married -- the incest laws, the mother and the child, assuming they are of age -- I can -- I can accept that the State has probably an overbearing interest on -- on protecting the a child until they're of age to marry, but what's left? - Justice Sotomayor
    I'm not going to debate what the definition of marriage has been with you. This isn't even in dispute between rational individuals. You're a radical frothing at the mouth extremist if you believe it's ever been anything other than man + woman. Nero and Spirit Brother absurdity doesn't prove that the collective psychological and emotional understanding of the definition of marriage by civil society throughout history has ever meant man + ? or woman + ?

    Even the Spartans understood the important of marriage as an institution, and there was rampant homosexuality within their culture.

    So we're back at step one. You seem unable to answer simple straightforward questions. I'm going to ask you one time. You're emotional temper tantrums and screaming "bigot" at anyone who disagrees with you is beginning to bore me.

    Do you believe marriage is a "Civil Right"?

    Yes or No

    If gays get the special right to change the definition of what marriage is, why can't anyone else have the same right to change the definition as they see fit too?

  7. #647
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,136

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    What has changed is that most of society now recognizes being gay as a status not just conduct.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  8. #648
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    What has changed is that most of society now recognizes being gay as a status not just conduct.
    Those that either don't read a bible, or recognize it for the fiction it is...
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  9. #649
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    ........Not that Marriage has ever meant anything other than man + woman. It's radically extreme to claim marriage has ever meant anything other than man + woman.
    So can you finally get around to directly answering me questions now? Thanks
    so stating facts is radically extreme?
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

  10. #650
    Professor
    marywollstonecraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    08-14-13 @ 09:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,317

    Re: Scalia Wonders If Same-Sex Parents ‘Harmful’ To Children

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    I did ... and I saw responses to it. I thought you had something more, um, persuasive.
    You have a peculiar list of cultures you want to emulate.
    I'm not interested in emulating anything.

    I am just demonstrating that the claim "marriage has ALWAYS been between a man and a woman" is untrue.
    I am sorry if you don't find factual information persuasive, although it is often the case that people will not accept factual information when it challenges their preconceived beliefs.
    Every political good carried to the extreme must be productive of evil.

Posting Permissions

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