Page 29 of 38 FirstFirst ... 192728293031 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 373

Thread: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Showdow

  1. #281
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,814

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    1.)It's Texas' choice to do this if they want to.
    2.) No law prohibits it.
    1.)this is currently 100% true.
    2.) i dont think its going to stay this way


    though i have said many times i believe the TSSC will rule against these guys and they will push it to SCOTUS where it will be changed. (although i could be wrong other judges in the state already ruled this is a violation in thier opinion)

    and when this cases gets there I do NOT think SCOTUS will make the national change(based on this case, they will in the future) making all states grant equal rights and grant SSM but i do think they will rule that divorce requirements in all states will apply to all recognized state marriages no matter their make up.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  2. #282
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Has nothing to do with Individual Rights. Being gay is not a race. Why should gays have the right to redefine marriage to whatever postmodernism definition they see fit over polygamists or pedophiles? Yea I know, we'll never go there right? Yea sure we won't. The groundwork to rationalize it as "normal" and therefore "acceptable" is already being lain.

    Gays don't deserve a special right to redefine marriage over any other political group based upon their sexual deviancy. They should create their own institutions, their own traditions for the homosexual community. Marriage is for heteros only and it should stay that way. If it's about taxes and inheritance, then just grant those institutions and traditions homosexuals create the same exempt status. This should be left up to the states to decide however. These types of social issues were supposed to be worked out by the states by design. In the instance of "gay rights", what they want tramples on the rights of others and changes the definition of words for no rational reason, so the concept of it being a "right" that gay people previously didn't possess is a false premise.



    There is no right for gays to be able to marry in The Constitution. The Founders never conceived of such a deviant perversion of marriage.
    Well....you are just plain and simply wrong. There is something in the Constitution called "Equal Protection". It was exactly what Kennedy was referencing in his majority opinion in the DOMA case and the reason why Scalia was so vitriolic in his dissent. The writing is on the wall. This war is over, only a small battle or two remain, but this one is DOA for the bigots who are clinging to their fight against marriage equality.
    <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>

  3. #283
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.)this is currently 100% true.
    2.) i dont think its going to stay this way


    though i have said many times i believe the TSSC will rule against these guys and they will push it to SCOTUS where it will be changed. (although i could be wrong other judges in the state already ruled this is a violation in thier opinion)

    and when this cases gets there I do NOT think SCOTUS will make the national change(based on this case, they will in the future) making all states grant equal rights and grant SSM but i do think they will rule that divorce requirements in all states will apply to all recognized state marriages no matter their make up.
    I don't SCOTUS should rule on national marriage honestly. I think these guys should have to move back to Mass. Harsh, however, it should be Texas' right to uphold their state laws. If not, we could have activists doing things like this all the time. Imagine a gun owner applying for and receiving a concealed carry permit, then moving to Washington DC and saying "Well, my state allows it so you should to." Not a good precedent to set IMO. These guys screwed up by A) Marrying the wrong person, and, B) Moving to a state this is not friendly towards their situation.
    “Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

  4. #284
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,814

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineTpartier View Post
    1.)I don't SCOTUS should rule on national marriage honestly.
    2.) I think these guys should have to move back to Mass. Harsh, however, it should be Texas' right to uphold their state laws.
    3.) If not, we could have activists doing things like this all the time.
    4.) Imagine a gun owner applying for and receiving a concealed carry permit, then moving to Washington DC and saying "Well, my state allows it so you should to."
    5.) Not a good precedent to set IMO.
    6.) These guys screwed up by A) Marrying the wrong person, and, B) Moving to a state this is not friendly towards their situation.
    1.) well they already called marriage a right 14 times and this is not very different than interracial marriage. Precedence all leads that way. IMO whats going to happen, is eventual theres going to be a national foundation established and equal rights granted to gays.

    states will still have rights to determine the minor things( just like now nothign is going to change) in marriage but they will no longer be allowed to discriminate and deny equal rights.

    2.) thats just absurd, i agree with state rights also but not when they violate other individual rights. expecting these two to just pack up and leave and live in MASS for a whole year is just wrong IMO. i see zero justification to it. no logic no rational IMO.
    3.) well they arent activists but we are going to have them(activist) anyway and its why the court system is there to determine these things. its how the system is supposed to work.
    4.) i would do this personally if it wasnt a felony , luckily these men arent breaking any laws and you know as well as i do if that wasnt a felony it would have been done by now. Probably would of had a million rifle march. I woulda went!

    also on a side note i think thats another area states are completely over stepping their bounds ESPECIALLY since its in the constitution. theres no reason why my CWP shouldn't be national like my drivers license. But fighting it is a different measure.

    5.) set? thats our history its how minorities, women, interracial marriage etc have all been done and those are just the major issues, there 1000s of little ones

    6.) theres no facts to support that just opinion.
    nobody knows what the future holds sometime marriage dont last and we have no idea why they are living in texas? job/career? business? family? death? etc etc maybe a dad dead and they are running a company business, maybe a family member is sick/disabled and they are taking care of them, hell maybe they just wanted rainbow cowboy boats. THe thing is they are free to move around in the US and if this was straight marriage it be a non-issues and thats what gives it the grounds to make it this far.


    also please note to spectators. MTP, IMO is a good poster, a respected poster. I have seen his share of playing games and giving people crab and playing with trolls but in general he speaks his opinion ADMITS when its his opinion, acknowledges mistakes and identifies facts also. Me and him dont agreee on things but its his ability to simply deal in REALITY, FACTS and OPINIONS that allows a general conversation like this above.

    SOme of you are simply incapable and its why your posts get destroyed by many and they fail.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  5. #285
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Well....you are just plain and simply wrong. There is something in the Constitution called "Equal Protection". It was exactly what Kennedy was referencing in his majority opinion in the DOMA case and the reason why Scalia was so vitriolic in his dissent. The writing is on the wall. This war is over, only a small battle or two remain, but this one is DOA for the bigots who are clinging to their fight against marriage equality.
    Kennedy is a political activist. A lawyer in a black robe. That same argument can be made for any conceivable sexual deviancy, polygamy ect. Where does it stop? At what point will we have equality? Unisex bathrooms? Sodomy being taught to pre schoolers? Gay Family shows? Every week a new gay thread is started where emo libs "champion gay rights" and call everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.

    There is a moral boundary that has always existed that is being breached here. Rights and beliefs for what consists of a healthy and functioning society are clashing. A new morality is being created by a secular society that praises and worships deviant filthy behavior. They are imposing that morality onto the rest of society and it's now encroaching upon First Amendment rights. The people throwing the word bigot around with impunity are acting like Fascists.

    So let's compromise. Let the states decide by a vote. Once that vote is cast that decision is ingrained into The Constitution and can never be repealed. You believe in the right to vote right?

  6. #286
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Kennedy is a political activist. A lawyer in a black robe. That same argument can be made for any conceivable sexual deviancy, polygamy ect. Where does it stop? At what point will we have equality? Unisex bathrooms? Sodomy being taught to pre schoolers? Gay Family shows? Every week a new gay thread is started where emo libs "champion gay rights" and call everyone who disagrees with them a bigot. There is a moral boundary that has always existed that is being breached here. Rights and beliefs for what consists of a healthy and functioning society are clashing. A new morality is being created by a secular society that praises and worships deviant filthy behavior. They are imposing that morality onto the rest of society and it's now encroaching upon First Amendment rights. The people throwing the word bigot around with impunity are acting like Fascists. So let's compromise. Let the states decide by a vote. Once that vote is cast that decision is ingrained into The Constitution and can never be repealed. You believe in the right to vote right?
    Wow....how many slippery slopes can you throw into one irrational argument?The only "new morality" being created is one that focuses back on the Fundamental rights that this country was founded upon and preventing our country from being surrendered to a radical right-wing social agenda that seeks to curtail those rights.Sorry....but the Constitution exists because certain rights are fundamental and should NEVER be subjected to the tryanny of the majority. To put it simply.....fundamental rights should never be put to a popular vote.
    <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>

  7. #287
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,814

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Kennedy is a political activist. A lawyer in a black robe. That same argument can be made for any conceivable sexual deviancy, polygamy ect. Where does it stop? At what point will we have equality? Unisex bathrooms? Sodomy being taught to pre schoolers? Gay Family shows? Every week a new gay thread is started where emo libs "champion gay rights" and call everyone who disagrees with them a bigot.

    There is a moral boundary that has always existed that is being breached here. Rights and beliefs for what consists of a healthy and functioning society are clashing. A new morality is being created by a secular society that praises and worships deviant filthy behavior. They are imposing that morality onto the rest of society and it's now encroaching upon First Amendment rights. The people throwing the word bigot around with impunity are acting like Fascists.

    So let's compromise. Let the states decide by a vote. Once that vote is cast that decision is ingrained into The Constitution and can never be repealed. You believe in the right to vote right?
    you do not compromise on equal rights, there is no such thing. You do not get to vote other rights away and think thats the end.
    nothing is being imposed nothing is encroaching the 1st
    and anybody that is actively fighting or would actively fight to STOP equal rights for gays is in fact bigot. but those that simply dont agree with those views are not.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #288
    Guru
    WorldWatcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,041

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    So let's compromise. Let the states decide by a vote. Once that vote is cast that decision is ingrained into The Constitution and can never be repealed. You believe in the right to vote right?
    So you want the right to vote now, but in the future votes wouldn't matter? Wow, that's a vote for democracy.

    Thinking about the fact that Maine voted in 2009 against SSCM yet in 2012 it passed based on a vote of the people. You want to deny future people the right to vote?


    >>>>

  9. #289
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Wow....how many slippery slopes can you throw into one irrational argument?The only "new morality" being created is one that focuses back on the Fundamental rights that this country was founded upon and preventing our country from being surrendered to a radical right-wing social agenda that seeks to curtail those rights.Sorry....but the Constitution exists because certain rights are fundamental and should NEVER be subjected to the tryanny of the majority. To put it simply.....fundamental rights should never be put to a popular vote.
    This is why we can't have an honest discussion. Gay Marriage was never conceived as a "right" by The Founders of this country. The Founders of this country believed what I believe about homosexual and other perverted lifestyles. That they are deviant and filthy. That we shouldn't teach such nasty debauchery to our children. The only people with a social agenda here, which is to change societal norms, are radicals like you.

    Let the people decide if only gays get the special right (not fundamental right) to change the definition of marriage from man + woman to man + ? or woman + ?

  10. #290
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: Texas' Refusal To Allow Gay Couples To Divorce May Be The Next Constitutional Sho

    Quote Originally Posted by WorldWatcher View Post
    So you want the right to vote now, but in the future votes wouldn't matter? Wow, that's a vote for democracy.

    Thinking about the fact that Maine voted in 2009 against SSCM yet in 2012 it passed based on a vote of the people. You want to deny future people the right to vote?


    >>>>
    Yes we need to set societal standards on what is moral and decent. Standards which are not subject to change and not subject to interpretation.

    Every deviant is going to come out of the cracks claiming they are "born that way and normal" so they deserve to get married too

Page 29 of 38 FirstFirst ... 192728293031 ... 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
  •