View Poll Results: What say you?

Voters
97. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes. All humans should be protected under the law.

    27 27.84%
  • No. Marriage is between one man and one woman, period.

    20 20.62%
  • No. Only homosexuals and heterosexuals should be allowed to marry.

    6 6.19%
  • I donít care what they do as long as they stay out of my business.

    34 35.05%
  • My catís name is Mittens.

    10 10.31%
Page 49 of 73 FirstFirst ... 39474849505159 ... LastLast
Results 481 to 490 of 725

Thread: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

  1. #481
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    You don't get it, do you, Chris? A right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others. Marriage requires permission and sanction of the state. You may chose to live, love, screw whomever you wish with consensual framework all as a right, but you cannot claim as a right something the state must afford to you. It seems these days we get all too happy bastardizing the use, meaning and concept of "rights" and this is a clear example of that. The state must define marriage. It must adjudicate marriage and divorce. It must define tax codes. It must define all the laws of this legal and binding contract. There is no natural "right" to marriage. Sanctioned marriage is a state institution and you don't have any natural "right" to a state institution. You may argue that you have a natural right to be treated like anyone else and go with that angle to argue that whatever relationship you may be in should be deemed as marriage, but to argue that you have a natural right to a state sanction makes no sense unless we dispense with the real meaning of rights.
    None of this is any good reason to deny people the opportunity to be married if that is what they desire.

  2. #482
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    None of this is any good reason to deny people the opportunity to be married if that is what they desire.
    What if the state stopped issuing sanctioned marriages to anyone? Would they still have the right to make the state issue them a sanctioned marriage? The "right" you say people cannot be denied is actually an action by the state; not a right. You seem to feel that anyone who wants the state to sanction whatever sort of relationship they desire has some right to make the state do it. Now if marriage was something people did for themselves, they'd absolutely have every RIGHT to do it. You just don't have a right to make other people do something for you.... like issue you a marriage license and/or sanction your relationship.... and/or give you money.... and/or mow your lawn.... and/or anything that takes the action of someone else in your behalf.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  3. #483
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    What if the state stopped issuing sanctioned marriages to anyone? Would they still have the right to make the state issue them a sanctioned marriage? The "right" you say people cannot be denied is actually an action by the state; not a right. You seem to feel that anyone who wants the state to sanction whatever sort of relationship they desire has some right to make the state do it. Now if marriage was something people did for themselves, they'd absolutely have every RIGHT to do it. You just don't have a right to make other people do something for you.... like issue you a marriage license and/or sanction your relationship.... and/or give you money.... and/or mow your lawn.... and/or anything that takes the action of someone else in your behalf.
    What are you talking about? It's simply issuing a marriage license. People cannot get married without one, so instead of (as you say) the state sanctioning a marriage, right now it is more as if the state is telling certain groups that they CANNOT marry. And I already specified that it wouldn't be any sort of relationship one desired. Should I put it in all caps? I said that only consenting adults should be able to marry. That means people that are of or over the legal age of consent to marry.

    However, it should also be noted that I think the age of consent should be 18 across the board. That would prevent a lot of harm to young people, which I happen to think is the cause of the high divorce rate - people marrying too young, not really knowing each other well enough and just jumping into it.

    A few things would have to be altered, but I'm quite sure it's not as big a deal as you are making it sound.

  4. #484
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    What if the state stopped issuing sanctioned marriages to anyone? Would they still have the right to make the state issue them a sanctioned marriage? The "right" you say people cannot be denied is actually an action by the state; not a right. You seem to feel that anyone who wants the state to sanction whatever sort of relationship they desire has some right to make the state do it. Now if marriage was something people did for themselves, they'd absolutely have every RIGHT to do it. You just don't have a right to make other people do something for you.... like issue you a marriage license and/or sanction your relationship.... and/or give you money.... and/or mow your lawn.... and/or anything that takes the action of someone else in your behalf.
    Then the state would have to stop recognizing any familial relationship or they would face a huge increase in civil suits over property and other problems.

    But as long as the state does issue marriage licenses, then it must do so in accordance with the US Constitution, which states that states must treat people equally under laws. The SCOTUS uses scrutiny to determine how this operates and has consistently said that, within certain levels of scrutiny, the state must show at least a minimum of a rational state interest being furthered when anybody can show that they are being treated differently by laws.
    "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.

  5. #485
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    What are you talking about? It's simply issuing a marriage license. People cannot get married without one, so instead of (as you say) the state sanctioning a marriage, right now it is more as if the state is telling certain groups that they CANNOT marry.
    You still don't get it. The state doesn't HAVE to license anyone. If you want your argument to make any sense at all, you need to frame it properly because it's not that the state has to license anyone that wants licensed. The state could wash it's hands of marriage and then what's your argument? Marriage isn't a right. I think if you want to argue sensibly on the "rights" issue, you need to argue rights based on equal treatment under the law, which I still think is a losing argument but at least it makes some sense.

    However, I do get that your position on this is that any adults should be able to call anything they want marriage as long as everyone involve consents - and that the state should license it and adjudicate it and/or any divorce and child custody issues that might arise from it. And that you believe this should extend to polygamy.

    And you have a right to that belief. In fact, you are evidence of an argument I was making on another thread that polygamy is absolutely next up because a lot of people feel just as you do that there should be no restrictions at all on marriage save legal age.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  6. #486
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Then the state would have to stop recognizing any familial relationship or they would face a huge increase in civil suits over property and other problems.

    But as long as the state does issue marriage licenses, then it must do so in accordance with the US Constitution, which states that states must treat people equally under laws. The SCOTUS uses scrutiny to determine how this operates and has consistently said that, within certain levels of scrutiny, the state must show at least a minimum of a rational state interest being furthered when anybody can show that they are being treated differently by laws.
    At least yours is the right argument; going for the equal protection under the law angle. I don't find it actually fits but at least it is an arguable position.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  7. #487
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post

    You still don't get it. The state doesn't HAVE to license anyone. If you want your argument to make any sense at all, you need to frame it properly because it's not that the state has to license anyone that wants licensed. The state could wash it's hands of marriage and then what's your argument? Marriage isn't a right. I think if you want to argue sensibly on the "rights" issue, you need to argue rights based on equal treatment under the law, which I still think is a losing argument but at least it makes some sense.

    However, I do get that your position on this is that any adults should be able to call anything they want marriage as long as everyone involve consents - and that the state should license it and adjudicate it and/or any divorce and child custody issues that might arise from it. And that you believe this should extend to polygamy.

    And you have a right to that belief. In fact, you are evidence of an argument I was making on another thread that polygamy is absolutely next up because a lot of people feel just as you do that there should be no restrictions at all on marriage save legal age.
    That IS what I'm arguing. That the state is pointing to certain groups and telling them that they cannot be married, while at the same heterosexual couples are the only group which gets this privilege.

    No, not just legal age, consent would be required. Stop misrepresenting my arguments.

  8. #488
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    At least yours is the right argument; going for the equal protection under the law angle. I don't find it actually fits but at least it is an arguable position.
    Of course it fits. Explain how it doesn't please.

  9. #489
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    That IS what I'm arguing. That the state is pointing to certain groups and telling them that they cannot be married, while at the same heterosexual couples are the only group which gets this privilege.

    No, not just legal age, consent would be required. Stop misrepresenting my arguments.
    My error.... consent and legal age being the only restrictions you think should be in place.

    Suffice to say I disagree (and did not mean to misrepresent your argument at all).

    My argument is that the state created the legal framework of marriage for a specific relationship model and for specific reasons and is not compelled by law to provide the same framework for any relationship by any group of people any more than you can demand the state consider you a nonprofit corporation just because you think the benefits of that are groovy.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

  10. #490
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    re: What about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Of course it fits. Explain how it doesn't please.
    I did explain it. If you don't get it by now, I have to accept that you're just not going to get it for whatever the reason may be.
    You can't reason anyone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.

Page 49 of 73 FirstFirst ... 39474849505159 ... 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
  •