View Poll Results: What is same sex marriage?

Voters
192. You may not vote on this poll
  • A special right

    109 56.77%
  • Equal protection

    62 32.29%
  • Other

    21 10.94%
Page 92 of 98 FirstFirst ... 42829091929394 ... LastLast
Results 911 to 920 of 976

Thread: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

  1. #911
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,516

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Courts have the constitutional power to interpret the constitution. As it stands, the courts have found that marriage is a civil right, and as such is afforded constitutional protection (Loving v. Virginia). United States v. Carolene Products Co. created the classifications of various levels of scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause, with cases following it helping to flesh out what those various levels of scrutiny are. As of now, my entire argument has been based around the notion that marriage as it stands currently is unconstitutionally discriminating against sex, which is a middle tier scrutiny classification. Additionally, against your ridiculous act, I've been pointing out that "polygamsts" or "Numbers of people involved in a contract" are not classified under intermediate nor strict scrutiny tiers and thus would require but a rational basis-test.
    So if marriage is a civil right, anti bigamy laws should be found unconstitutional as they infringe on the pursuit of life and liberty.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    It is a rational argument to suggest that the great and significant shift within our laws, court system, and tax code that would take place with the shift to polygamy with little benefit towards the governments interest in marriage (which is to propagate a stable family environment, where in two individuals is deemed suitable and would be met before the 3 or more would come into place with polygamy) and as such its rational to suggest the states interest is served by not expending the resources in time, man power, and money to institute such changes.
    As Jerry pointed out it would not be the first time. So no it's not and the facts bear this out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    See, just because you didn't feel like taking the time to read my words and research them, in large part because you have nothing vested in this ridiculous act of yours, doesn't mean they're not constitutional. I've spelled out pretty clearly prior to this what I was basing it off of and now clear as day for you. My argument is based on constitutional law and actual facts...yours is based off a flawed interpretation of an argument you don't like and worthless appeals to emotion.
    Excuses for no argument
    Last edited by Black Dog; 01-19-11 at 12:50 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  2. #912
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,990

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    #1 Obama care is not a fallacy or red herring. It is the perfect example of being to "complicated" is not an excuse or argument as the facts of government say different.
    Obama care has zero to do with the equal protection clause nor discrimination under the law and its constitutionality nor with the levels of scrutiny under the 14th amendment.

    #2 I understand your argument as far as "it's your business" and yet when it comes to gay marriage proponents still say it's none of my business.
    I don't give a **** what gay marriage proponents are saying. I care what I'm saying. Of which your arguments make absolutely zero sense. And, your horrible attempt to mimic them does not equal their actual arguments. From my understanding there's far more evidence to suggest sexual orientation as something that's hardwired more so than polygamy, giving it a far more logical chance of being eventually added under the EPC then polygamy is. So even your attempt at making them the same doesn't work, and in and of itself is flawed because you THINK it works based off nothing but your own extremely narrow view of the issue based on your beliefs of what is "RIGHT" based on what YOU think your god wants.

    The rest is again another personal attack rant. So forgive me for ignoring it.
    Dealing with your debate style isn't a "personal rant", its addressing the flaws and errors in your method of argument. Of course you don't want to address it, you think that somehow this little charade is proving anything other than your ignorance of what the other side is ACTUALLY arguing by anyone who isn't just that sides mirror counter part to the "GAYS ARE SINFUL! BUTTSEX WILL RUIN AMERICA" crowd and that you've apparently ran out of ways to actually defend your own point honestly and upfront.

  3. #913
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    When I'm the most calm, civil and truly sincere, that's when people think I'm joking around. It's oly when I lie that people take me seriously and accept me at face value.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Till that point, I'll be the one here actually dealing with reality and arguments based on actual constitutional law rather than poorly done satire or 4chan styled antagonizing.
    Oh look which Mod wants to start trolling again...why do I ever bother even trying to be remotely sincere on this forum.


    Kindly answer the challenges or excuse yourself from this discussion.

  4. #914
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,990

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    So if marriage is a civil right, anti bigamy laws should be found unconstitutional as they infringe on the pursuit of life and liberty. What 2 or more consenting adults do in private is not the concern of other
    Incorrect. Sorry blackdog, been over this three times now. Stop your at and actually read what I said. I'm tired of typing **** that you can ignore and spout the same stuff over and over again.

    If a man wishes to be married under his church, PRIVATELY as you keep saying, I've got no problem. If he wants both those marriages to be recognized by the government, and gain the benefits of marriage under the government, then its no longer "private".

  5. #915
    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: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    That sounds like separate but equal. Much like civil unions for gays?
    There is no "separate but equal" to it at all, since it wouldn't be equal, and it shouldn't be completely equal. There are a lot of problems that arise from making such a thing legal. Problems that do not in any way arise with same sex marriage.

    BTW, are you going to ever address any of my actual points, instead of making these petty comments trying to imply that I don't truly want equality for everyone? Doing so would certainly make your argument look better.
    "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.

  6. #916
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    Marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution at any point. Of course the 1st section of the 14 amendment does mention "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    Basically your argument has been it's to complicated. That has nothing at all to do with Constitutional law.

    So where does that leave your argument? I'll tell you...

    It's not bad to discriminate as long as YOU agree with it.
    Wrong. And I'll tell you why.

    "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States..."

    Notice the key word there. Marriage is a law. As such, that puts it under the 14th amendment. Now let's look at that other part.

    "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    Due process of law? What does that mean? Well it means that it has to stand up to the scrutiny of the courts. So what standard do the courts use to judge whether a law discriminates or not? They use the levels of Scrutiny.

    Levels of Scrutiny Under the Three-Tiered Approach to Equal Protection Analysis
    1. STRICT SCRUTINY (The government must show that the challenged classification serves a compelling state interest and that the classification is necessary to serve that interest.):
    A. Suspect Classifications:
    1. Race
    2. National Origin
    3. Religion (either under EP or Establishment Clause analysis)
    4. Alienage (unless the classification falls within a recognized "political community" exception, in which case only rational basis scrutiny will be applied).
    B. Classifications Burdening Fundamental Rights
    1. Denial or Dilution of the Vote
    2. Interstate Migration
    3. Access to the Courts
    4. Other Rights Recognized as Fundamental
    2. MIDDLE-TIER SCRUTINY (The government must show that the challenged classification serves an important state interest and that the classification is at least substantially related to serving that interest.):
    Quasi-Suspect Classifications:
    1. Gender
    2. Illegitimacy
    3. MINIMUM (OR RATIONAL BASIS) SCRUTINY (The govenment need only show that the challenged classification is rationally related to serving a legitimate state interest.)
    Levels of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause

    Well, where do you suppose marriage laws restricting marriage to two people of the opposite sex falls on the levels of scrutiny? Well will you look at that, it fall unders the Middle Tier. So what does it have to do to meet court scrutiny and therefore respect due process of law?

    The government must show that the challenged classification serves an important state interest and that the classification is at least substantially related to serving that interest

    So Blackdog, how do same sex marriage bans which restrict the definition of marriage to a man and woman serve an "important state interest"?

    Thank you. This lesson on Constitutional Law 101 was brought to you by CriticalThought.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 01-19-11 at 12:56 AM.

  7. #917
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,516

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Obama care has zero to do with the equal protection clause nor discrimination under the law and its constitutionality nor with the levels of scrutiny under the 14th amendment.
    Interesting? Please point out where I said any of this? I said it was an example of laws getting complicated, nothing more.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I don't give a **** what gay marriage proponents are saying. I care what I'm saying. Of which your arguments make absolutely zero sense. And, your horrible attempt to mimic them does not equal their actual arguments. From my understanding there's far more evidence to suggest sexual orientation as something that's hardwired more so than polygamy, giving it a far more logical chance of being eventually added under the EPC then polygamy is. So even your attempt at making them the same doesn't work, and in and of itself is flawed because you THINK it works based off nothing but your own extremely narrow view of the issue based on your beliefs of what is "RIGHT" based on what YOU think your god wants.
    No proof exists to this day being gay is hard wired, no more than any other sexual orientation really. No "gay gene" exists. So now it is OK to discriminate if something is more likely as well? Wow! Thanks for filling me in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Dealing with your debate style isn't a "personal rant", its addressing the flaws and errors in your method of argument. Of course you don't want to address it, you think that somehow this little charade is proving anything other than your ignorance of what the other side is ACTUALLY arguing by anyone who isn't just that sides mirror counter part to the "GAYS ARE SINFUL! BUTTSEX WILL RUIN AMERICA" crowd and that you've apparently ran out of ways to actually defend your own point honestly and upfront.
    Hmmm... nothing but a personal attack because you know you really have no real argument, and you don't.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  8. #918
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,516

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Wrong. And I'll tell you why.

    "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States..."

    Notice the key word there. Marriage is a law. As such, that puts it under the 14th amendment. Now let's look at that other part.

    "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    Due process of law? What does that mean? Well it means that it has to stand up to the scrutiny of the courts. So what standard do the courts use to judge whether a law discriminates or not? The use the levels of Scrutiny.
    OK and this backs up my argument, thanks.


    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Levels of Scrutiny Under the Equal Protection Clause

    Well, where do you suppose marriage laws restricting marriage to two people of the opposite sex falls on the levels of scrutiny? Well will you look at that, it fall unders the Middle Tier. So what does it have to do to meet court scrutiny and therefore respect due process of law?

    The government must show that the challenged classification serves an important state interest and that the classification is at least substantially related to serving that interest

    So Blackdog, how do same sex marriage bans which restrict the definition of marriage to a man and woman serve an "important state interest"?
    What does this have to do with my statement?

    PS Gender has nothing to do with polygamy and it would also fall under a much higher tier "religion."
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  9. #919
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    No proof exists to this day being gay is hard wired, no more than any other sexual orientation really. No "gay gene" exists. So now it is OK to discriminate if something is more likely as well? Wow! Thanks for filling me in.
    So what? Marriage laws don't discriminate based on sexuality. They discriminate based on sex. There is no law out there that says, "Two gays cannot marry each others." The law states that only a man can marry a woman.

  10. #920
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,516

    Re: Same sex marriage: what is it really?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    There is no "separate but equal" to it at all, since it wouldn't be equal, and it shouldn't be completely equal. There are a lot of problems that arise from making such a thing legal.
    The "it's to complicated" argument has been refuted using historical precedent, sorry will not float.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Problems that do not in any way arise with same sex marriage.
    So what?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    BTW, are you going to ever address any of my actual points, instead of making these petty comments trying to imply that I don't truly want equality for everyone? Doing so would certainly make your argument look better.
    Why? You don't want equality for everyone. You said it is OK to discriminate in certain circumstance. How is that equality for everyone???
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

Page 92 of 98 FirstFirst ... 42829091929394 ... 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
  •