Page 18 of 24 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 232

Thread: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

  1. #171
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    1.) And Agent J, not Holder's call to make.
    2.) The fed does not issue or control the issue of marriage licenses.
    1.)your wrong opinion is noted, yet the fact remains the marriages are being recognized by the FED and will continue to be recognized unless the court rules against equal rights.
    2.) weird can you point out where i said they issued them or controlled them? oh thats right i didnt just another failed strawman by you, why do you continue to post fantasy and meaningless points

    facts destroyed your post again

    FACTS:
    SSM is an equal rights issue

    right now those marriages are 100% legal and recognized by the fed granting all LEGAL and LAWFUL federal rights to them, the state will also be granting any FEDERAL rights to them too, so NO they are factually NOT meaningless and YES they do have force of law behind them

    let me know when this factually changes
    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. #172
    Sage
    shrubnose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Europe
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 03:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,851
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    If Colorado can tell the feds to **** off and sell marijuana openly, then Utah has every right to regulate marriages by traditional standards.



    Wrong.

    No state has the right to deny any of its citizens the rights that it grants to others.

    Anyone who thinks (Wishes, hopes, dreams.) that the U.S. Supreme Court will ever make a decision denying equal rights to all will be disappointed.

    Wait and see.




    "Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll

  3. #173
    Professor
    wolfsgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,139

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Not as to standing they didn't. Both the Ninth and the California Supremes decided the People DID have standing in the case even and especially if the state abandoned their duty.
    And the 9th and the Ca supreme court are not the US supreme court. Take it up with them if you have an issue. I would rather they have heard the case in full, but they did what they did and I have to live with the courts decision.
    " May you live as long as you wish, and love as long as you live"
    R.A. Heinlein

  4. #174
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Again, the fed can onl;y control what licences it will accept, they do not issue or authorize those licenses. If the issuing state puts a hold on said license there is nothing for the fed to recognise until the state activates the license. Holder doesn't have a legal say in the matter. In fact, this opens up yet another court case based upon the 10th if the IRS provides benefit while the state licenses are in limbo.

    The rest of your screed is just the same old repetitive nonsense you try to pass as fact.

  5. #175
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,708

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    So that's a no? In terms of legal language this appeals brief is a summation of the questions surrounding the Prop 8 decision. What you think legal briefs are short? LOL.. I've never read a short one, perhaps you can show me one. In legal circles, you must be formal in your language, you must provide a timetable of events, and you must make arguments for each event and ask the court to review each based on the merits. IN an appeals brief, you're essentially asking the court to review the evidence, and the facts, and consider precedence where applicable. In short, the 9th circuit relied on a misapplication of previous decisions, it misapplied the precedence of its own courts decisions regarding how they handled similar challenges as ballot initiatives, and it also misapplied and misinterpreted how to apply a rational basis test in Prop 8. The 9th circuit relied on other states decisions that were dissimilar in context and outcome to form their majority opinion. The court, it was argued, was making law, in spite of the will of the people on a matter that was in every legally recognizable way, and based even on the courts own previous rulings, a matter left to the people to decide for themselves. Due process was served, and equal protection on a rational basis was met, and yet the court still struck down Prop 8. The brief argues that the court in its peculiar interpretation of the precedence was erroneous and egregiously legislating form the bench. It asks the SCOTUS to acknowledge these concerns and return to the people the amendment seeking to grant marriage to only that of a man and a woman, and to preserve the right of homosexuals to form civil unions. People forget that in Prop 8 they did not seek to take away rights to civil unions that was already granted in a prior legislative measure, but only to protect the traditional designation of marriage to that of a man and a woman. Still the 9th circuit ruled in its majority decision that it was the purpose of the people to punish by animosity a select group of individuals based on an unpopular charcter trait.

    Of course it's more in-depth in the brief, and if you truly want to understand the reasoning behind upholding traditional marriage then read the damn thing, but as I predicted, you won't as it doesn't fit with your narrative that all that are against gay marriage are mean spirited homophobic bigots.. So continue on.


    Tim-
    And if you want to understand why all of those reasons have been rejected, you read the Prop 8 case material. All of it.

    There, I'm done. I've proven why same-sex marriage bans are wrong!
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  6. #176
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfsgirl View Post
    And the 9th and the Ca supreme court are not the US supreme court. Take it up with them if you have an issue. I would rather they have heard the case in full, but they did what they did and I have to live with the courts decision.
    You're arguing the wrong point with the wrong person there. Yes, the SCOTUS ignored the rulings of both the Ninth and the CA supreme and their word is final. My argument is WHY they did so, it clearly wasn't based upon any constitutional principle, in fact just the reverse.

  7. #177
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,761

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    1.)Again, the fed can onl;y control what licences it will accept, they do not issue or authorize those licenses.
    2.) If the issuing state puts a hold on said license there is nothing for the fed to recognise until the state activates the license.
    3.) Holder doesn't have a legal say in the matter.
    4.) In fact, this opens up yet another court case based upon the 10th if the IRS provides benefit while the state licenses are in limbo.
    5.) The rest of your screed is just the same old repetitive nonsense you try to pass as fact.
    1.) again NOBODY debated this its meaningless footer that doesnt change the fact your statments were proven 100% wrong
    2.) 100% false as already proven with facts and links which trump your OPINION, it even says speciaffically they will recognize it while on hold and the state will alsw recognize them on hodl when it comes to any federal issues.

    this is fact would you like to read it AGAIN? lol

    3.) you are free to have this wrong opinion but facts prove you wrong
    4.) see #3
    5.) see #3

    lets go over the facts that prove you wrong again

    Feds recognize same-sex couples in Utah

    The Obama administration extended federal recognition to the marriages of more than 1,000 same-sex couples in Utah that took place before the Supreme Court put those unions in the state on hold.

    The action will enable the government to extend eligibility for federal benefits to these couples. That means gay and lesbian couples can file federal taxes jointly, get Social Security benefits for spouses and request legal immigration status for partners.

    Attorney General Eric Holder said the families should not be asked to endure uncertainty regarding their benefits while courts decide the issue of same-sex marriage in Utah.

    In a statement Friday afternoon, Herbert's office issued a statement that said Holder's announcement was unsurprising, but state officers should comply with federal law if they're providing federal services.

    your post/opinion is once again destroyed by facts


    if you disagree simply provide for us what FACTS you have to support your proven wrong opinion

    FACTS:
    SSM is an equal rights issue

    right now those marriages are 100% legal and recognized by the fed granting all LEGAL and LAWFUL federal rights to them, the state will also be granting any FEDERAL rights to them too, so NO they are factually NOT meaningless and YES they do have force of law behind them

    no amount of your opinion will change this fact
    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. #178
    Professor
    wolfsgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,139

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    You're arguing the wrong point with the wrong person there. Yes, the SCOTUS ignored the rulings of both the Ninth and the CA supreme and their word is final. My argument is WHY they did so, it clearly wasn't based upon any constitutional principle, in fact just the reverse.
    Read the 500 page link that Hiccup linked. That tells you their decision. I don't claim to understand how the supreme court operates, or why they make any decision they do. I just have to accept their decisions and go on with my life. I wish they had made a ruling, but they didn't. Eventually they will make a ruling on SSM.
    " May you live as long as you wish, and love as long as you live"
    R.A. Heinlein

  9. #179
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfsgirl View Post
    Read the 500 page link that Hiccup linked. That tells you their decision. I don't claim to understand how the supreme court operates, or why they make any decision they do. I just have to accept their decisions and go on with my life. I wish they had made a ruling, but they didn't. Eventually they will make a ruling on SSM.
    Again, arguing the wrong point with the wrong person. I agree, the SCOTUS decision is final. My point is that they clearly went against constitution to avoid ruling on the central issue. It's my view they did so because they knew that if they heard the argument they would, constitutionally, have to rule for the state.

    And Agent J, just keep repeating the same old nonsense. No matter how many times you repeat it, your opinions won't equal fact.

  10. #180
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,708

    Re: Utah will not recognize same-sex marriages performed before high court stay

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Again, arguing the wrong point with the wrong person. I agree, the SCOTUS decision is final. My point is that they clearly went against constitution to avoid ruling on the central issue. It's my view they did so because they knew that if they heard the argument they would, constitutionally, have to rule for the state.

    And Agent J, just keep repeating the same old nonsense. No matter how many times you repeat it, your opinions won't equal fact.
    Hahahah you keep telling yourself that SCOTUS is going to rule against same-sex marriage.

    No, they rejected the last case on standing. See, they ruled that these "pro-family" groups don't have standing to appeal the case to SCOTUS in the first place. Because these groups aren't affected by the situation in any way. SCOTUS straight-up said that the anti-SSM crowd doesn't have a dog in the fight.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Page 18 of 24 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... 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
  •