View Poll Results: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?

Voters
105. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, civil unions are an acceptable compromise.

    17 16.19%
  • No, they are not, because:

    55 52.38%
  • The government should not be involved with marriage, at all.

    25 23.81%
  • Other (Please Explain)

    8 7.62%
Page 80 of 83 FirstFirst ... 30707879808182 ... LastLast
Results 791 to 800 of 830

Thread: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

  1. #791
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    When in doubt, break out slippery slope arguments. Hint: from a legal standpoint the state can show at least some level of interest in limiting both incest and polygamy. SSM, not so much.
    what slippery slope? I thought the SSM arguement was centered around equal rights for consenting adults.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  2. #792
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,348
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    what slippery slope? I thought the SSM arguement was centered around equal rights for consenting adults.
    Might want to read the thread, since other arguments have been used. The most compelling argument in favor of SSM in general terms is that it is good for families. From a legal standpoint, it is probably unconstitutional to ban SSM.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #793
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,030

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    what slippery slope? I thought the SSM arguement was centered around equal rights for consenting adults.
    The state is allowed to show how "unfair laws" may serve a government purpose if they are able to actually provide a reasonable argument in how the "unfairness" is furthering a state interest. We have given ways that preventing incest and multiple people from entering into marriage can legitimately further many interests in just keeping people safe, along with other reasons. Whether they would hold up in court would be for cases dealing with those particular issues. But you nor anyone else has been able to show how preventing a man from marrying a man or a woman from marrying a woman can further any government interest in any way because it doesn't. Such relationships are legal and can not be shown to cause any harm in themselves when we are talking about consenting adults. They are still just two people, so no issues with extra problems from more nor issues with who would have the actual legal authority as spouse/most important spouse.

    The prevailing argument about denying same sex couples marriage access has been that marriage is for procreation and can be limited to only those who can procreate, but this is not how legally marriage works now since there is no age limit on marriage, there is no fertility test with marriage, and in fact, several states have laws that specifically say that certain couples can only get married if they cannot procreate with each other and those couples are still legally recognized as married by the federal government and many other states. Along with all these things, married couples are allowed to divorce even if they do have children.
    "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.

  4. #794
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Might want to read the thread, since other arguments have been used. The most compelling argument in favor of SSM in general terms is that it is good for families. From a legal standpoint, it is probably unconstitutional to ban SSM.
    might want to read the plethora of other threads on this and other forums. sure "other" arguments have been used...but the heart of the argument for SSM is that gays deserves equal rights, specifically the same rights as heteros when it comes to marriage.

    funny how those who squeal the loudest for "equal rights" are usually the first ones to spew a laundry list of excuses/reason why other non-traditional unions should be denied the very rights that they bleat for so loudly for themselves

    if gays "deserve" the right to get married....then any other group of consenting adults deserve that same right.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  5. #795
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    The state is allowed to show how "unfair laws" may serve a government purpose if they are able to actually provide a reasonable argument in how the "unfairness" is furthering a state interest. We have given ways that preventing incest and multiple people from entering into marriage can legitimately further many interests in just keeping people safe, along with other reasons. Whether they would hold up in court would be for cases dealing with those particular issues. But you nor anyone else has been able to show how preventing a man from marrying a man or a woman from marrying a woman can further any government interest in any way because it doesn't. Such relationships are legal and can not be shown to cause any harm in themselves when we are talking about consenting adults. They are still just two people, so no issues with extra problems from more nor issues with who would have the actual legal authority as spouse/most important spouse.

    The prevailing argument about denying same sex couples marriage access has been that marriage is for procreation and can be limited to only those who can procreate, but this is not how legally marriage works now since there is no age limit on marriage, there is no fertility test with marriage, and in fact, several states have laws that specifically say that certain couples can only get married if they cannot procreate with each other and those couples are still legally recognized as married by the federal government and many other states. Along with all these things, married couples are allowed to divorce even if they do have children.
    equal rights for everyone....unless you happen to disagree with them


    FWIW, 7 states already allow first cousins to marry (oddly enough Alabama is not one of them, but CA is) the arguments against incest are weak at best. the chances of having a "tarded" baby from an incestuous relationship are acutally quite low, unless the inbreeding continues for several generations.
    Last edited by OscarB63; 12-13-12 at 11:06 AM.
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  6. #796
    Professor
    wolfsgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 09:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,140

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    might want to read the plethora of other threads on this and other forums. sure "other" arguments have been used...but the heart of the argument for SSM is that gays deserves equal rights, specifically the same rights as heteros when it comes to marriage.

    funny how those who squeal the loudest for "equal rights" are usually the first ones to spew a laundry list of excuses/reason why other non-traditional unions should be denied the very rights that they bleat for so loudly for themselves

    if gays "deserve" the right to get married....then any other group of consenting adults deserve that same right.
    Then people who want other types of marriage should use the legal system to have those restrictions removed. No one else can fight their battle in court. Legal standing.
    " May you live as long as you wish, and love as long as you live"
    R.A. Heinlein

  7. #797
    Professor
    wolfsgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 09:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,140

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    equal rights for everyone....unless you happen to disagree with them


    FWIW, 7 states already allow first cousins to marry (oddly enough Alabama is not one of them, but CA is) the arguments against incest are weak at best. the chances of having a "tarded" baby from an incestuous relationship are acutally quite low, unless the inbreeding continues for several generations.
    For first cousins the rates are about 4-6% (better health)
    For siblings about 30% (better health)
    For IVF about 37% (natural news)
    For women over 45 1 in 30 (baby hopes)

    But those cases would have to be taken to court, and stand on their own merits.
    " May you live as long as you wish, and love as long as you live"
    R.A. Heinlein

  8. #798
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by wolfsgirl View Post
    For first cousins the rates are about 4-6% (better health)
    For siblings about 30% (better health)
    For IVF about 37% (natural news)
    For women over 45 1 in 30 (baby hopes)

    But those cases would have to be taken to court, and stand on their own merits.
    so what you are saying is that IVF have higher rates of "tardation" than sibling mating and yet no one is squealing to outlaw IVF.

    it's as I suspect. people find incest disgusting and morally unacceptable...just as the mojority of people used to view homosexuality. it's a personal preference. if you are going to support equal rights...support equal rights for everyone

    it is none of your, my, our business what consenting adults do in the bedroom.

    if two dude want to get married....fine
    if two cousins want to get married...fine
    if a girl and two guys want to get married....fine
    if a guy wants to marry becky the blowup doll....fine
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  9. #799
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,030

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    equal rights for everyone....unless you happen to disagree with them


    FWIW, 7 states already allow first cousins to marry (oddly enough Alabama is not one of them, but CA is) the arguments against incest are weak at best. the chances of having a "tarded" baby from an incestuous relationship are acutally quite low, unless the inbreeding continues for several generations.
    Wrong. Equal rights for all but limited by sound government reasoning, just as all rights are. Rights being restricted is almost always going to come down to whether the state can prove that the right of the individual/group is outweighed by the rights of others or benefit to society as a whole. But with either, the state will have to prove that either there is legitimate right to other(s) that is greater or that there is actually a benefit to society in the restriction, and not just say "we don't know what would happen or who might be affected, but we think ..." with nothing or very little to back this up

    Actually 19 states completely allow first cousins to marry with no restrictions (except in NC, where double first cousins can't, so offspring of first cousins cannot marry their first cousin). The other 5 states I alluded to are separate from these and they have restrictions that do not allow first cousins to marry if they can procreate. Plus, there are other states that recognize first cousin marriages but won't perform them, such as Washington state.

    I'm all for allowing first cousins to marry (although I think genetic counseling would be appropriate and possibly restrictions on double first cousins, since we know generational cousin incest can cause much larger problems). I honestly believe this is more likely to be our next "marriage" fight than something like polygamy.
    "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.

  10. #800
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,030

    Re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    might want to read the plethora of other threads on this and other forums. sure "other" arguments have been used...but the heart of the argument for SSM is that gays deserves equal rights, specifically the same rights as heteros when it comes to marriage.

    funny how those who squeal the loudest for "equal rights" are usually the first ones to spew a laundry list of excuses/reason why other non-traditional unions should be denied the very rights that they bleat for so loudly for themselves

    if gays "deserve" the right to get married....then any other group of consenting adults deserve that same right.
    The same could be said for anyone having the right to marry.

    "If opposite sex couples deserve the right to marry, then any other group of consenting adults deserve the same right."

    But the problem is that this isn't how our laws work. First you challenge the law in question. Then the state is able to make an argument for why the law furthers a state interest at the appropriate level of scrutiny. The side who challenged the law is allowed to counter any of the states' reasons for why they feel it furthers a legitimate interest with facts, including scientific findings, studies, statistics, how the law works compared to how it is being presented, and many other things. It ultimately comes down to whether the state made a good enough argument to stand up against the counter information presented and the right they are trying to restrict. Each separate issue must go through this process because in most cases, the state is going to have a different reason for why it is restricting the right.
    "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.

Page 80 of 83 FirstFirst ... 30707879808182 ... 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
  •