• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

He just forgot to mention it?
 
1.)Not in Utah, they are 100 percent null and void, and this was confirmed by Holder to be 100 percent legal and allowable.

wrong again LMAO its your verbiage that makes you wrong
UTAH is not currently recognizing equal rights and that was done by SCOTUS issuing the stay, this has never been argued, EVER

but with or without UTAH acknowledging the marriages they are still 100% intact and lega. They are recognized by the FED and every other state the recognizes equal rights.
All those couples are still 100% factually married. Utah just doesnt choose to recognize them on state issues but that doesnt change the fact they are 100% legally married.

SO again it is just like i said and have said since the begining, your mistake. If you disagree in your next post please present any facts that proove otherwise.
 
Except they are not recognizing the null and void marriages, which is 100 percent legal.
 
Boom called it! just like i said you CANT, all you did is regurgitate lies and opinions that dont fool anybody educated, honest and objective. That was awesome thank you again for the entertainment.

great long post but guess what, you could have simply saved yourself time and said the truth, "NO agent J i have no facts to support me"


facts still remains your opinions have ZERO impact
you posting lies over and over again will never change anything

he is factually a bigot by definition
SSM is factually an equal rights issues as facts, rights, laws, court cases and court precedent prove

remind me again what you have on your side besides "nu-huh" because you dont like it

thansk for proving me right tim and showing you have NOTHING, ZIP, ZERO ZILCH to change the facts

and incase you didnt understand the question ill ask again, if you disagree simply provide any FACTS that prove otherwise, i bet you wont and can . . . again


I'm not sure how anyone puts up with you?

Ok real quick. The governor is not a bigot for upholding the will or his constituents that through due process chose to preserve the traditional definition of marriage between a man and a woman.
Fact, some are calling SSM a equal rights issue. Fact, some are calling SSM a civil rights issue. Fact, some are calling SSM a social issue. Fact, rights, laws, court cases, and precedence, and I'll add legislative measures prove I'm correct with all three assertions above.

So what ya got now? ;)


Tim-
 
Marriage is licensed by the state, NOT the fed. If the state annuals the license there is nothing for the fed (or other states) to honor.
 
And there we have it, a perfect self-description. Once realization finally dawns upon you, you'll finally have arrived.

translation: you still have ZERO to support your lies while all the proof and facts lie with us. Let me know when this changes :)

facts:
SSM is an equal rights issue
the marriages issued are 100% intact and legal and all those people are still factually and legally married as far as the FED is concerned and any other state that recognizes equal rights, Facts defeat your post again.

do you have anything that proves otherwise? we have facts, links, definitions, court cases, laws, rights, court precedence proving all this true, remind us what you have besides "nu-huh" lol

maybe it will be in your next post
 
Sums up my take on the rationale behind denying gay marriage quite nicely.

http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Prop.-8-petition-7-31-12.pdf

It's long but well worth the read if you or anyone else is truly interested in why society has the right and responsibility to oppose gay marriage. I doubt you'll read it, as every time I've posted it, the person I've posted it for clams up. Will you, Deuce?


Tim-

That case used the 14th amendment to overturn Prop 8. Even though the USSC decided not to give the case cert the lower court decision stands. So basically the 14th amendment applies to state marriage laws.
 
Except they are not recognizing the null and void marriages, which is 100 percent legal.

UTAH isnt because of SCOTUS, correct which doesnt change any facts i presented, not one lol youll get it sooner or later
 
translation: you still have ZERO to support your lies while all the proof and facts lie with us. Let me know when this changes :)

Yet another perfect self-descriptor! You're on a roll today.
 
Except they are not recognizing the null and void marriages, which is 100 percent legal.

He didn't nullify or void those marriages. He said that the state will not recognize them until the case is over. When the SSM side wins the state will have to recognize those marriages.
 
He didn't nullify or void those marriages. He said that the state will not recognize them until the case is over. When the SSM side wins the state will have to recognize those marriages.

And, if it doesn't they won't, which has been the argument all along.
 
Federally?

The Prop 8 case was a state case. And it used the 14th amendment to overturn a voter referendum that banned SSM. Just like the Utah case.
 
1.)I'm not sure how anyone puts up with you?

2.) Ok real quick. The governor is not a bigot for upholding the will or his constituents that through due process chose to preserve the traditional definition of marriage between a man and a woman.
3.) Fact, some are calling SSM a equal rights issue. Fact, some are calling SSM a civil rights issue. Fact, some are calling SSM a social issue. Fact, rights, laws, court cases, and precedence, and I'll add legislative measures prove I'm correct with all three assertions above.

So what ya got now? ;)


Tim-

Nailed it AGAIN

1.) Deflections wont help you they just further expose your failed post and entertain me
2.) weird can you quote where i said thats why he is a bogot? BOOM! thats right i never did its another failed strawman by you lol

so again your answer is no agent J i have no facts that support my failed and proven wrong claims, GOT IT!

Let me know when you do

FACTS:
SSM is and equal rights issue
 
The Prop 8 case was a state case. And it used the 14th amendment to overturn a voter referendum that banned SSM. Just like the Utah case.

SCOTUS did not rule the person had no standing to sue?
 
That case used the 14th amendment to overturn Prop 8. Even though the USSC decided not to give the case cert the lower court decision stands. So basically the 14th amendment applies to state marriage laws.


Yes and as I stated this brief shows why the court was wrong in doing so. The USSC was cowardly, and simply chose to reply on a technical standing provision that has many in legal circles scratching their heads over.


Tim-
 
So they are null and void currently?

No. they are not being recognized by the state. When a marriage is voided, it is like it never happened. Voiding is basically canceling. The marriages are not canceled, just put on hold.
 
Yet another perfect self-descriptor! You're on a roll today.

still nothign thats what I thought, let us know when you have any facts to support you we'd love to read them

facts:
SSM is an equal rights issue
the marriages issued are 100% intact and legal and all those people are still factually and legally married as far as the FED is concerned and any other state that recognizes equal rights, Facts defeat your post again.

is there one facts that proves otherwise that you can present? one?

who wants to take bets the request is dodged again and more failed insults and meaningless opinions and deflections are posted instead of anything on topic, factual, accurate and civil?
 




You'll see 'for what' when the courts get finished with this mess.

I predict that Utah will be mighty sorry that it ever passed a law banning gay marriage when the U.S. Supreme Court is finished with this case.

Wait and see.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll
 
Last edited:
SCOTUS did not rule the person had no standing to sue?

In the ORIGINAL case which is the one that is still standing. If the USSC doesn't hear a case the lower court decision is still standing.
 
still nothign thats what I thought, let us know when you have any facts to support you we'd love to read them

facts:
SSM is an equal rights issue
the marriages issued are 100% intact and legal and all those people are still factually and legally married as far as the FED is concerned and any other state that recognizes equal rights, Facts defeat your post again.

is there one facts that proves otherwise that you can present? one?

who wants to take bets the request is dodged again and more failed insults and meaningless opinions and deflections are posted instead of anything on topic, factual, accurate and civil?

Again no facts, just your incorrect opinions. You still haven't learned that repitition of opinion does not equal fact.
 
I love the fear that equal rights winning and defeating bigotry and or discrimination brings out in those that support it

for all of those that support those things please push ALL these cases as far as you can, the soon the better and then equal rights will be national.

I hope all these cases get pushed to SCOTUS, the CASES itself, i hope this next won in UTAH sides on equal rights against and its pushed again to make the actual case go to SCOTUS!!

just a reminder of where we are at and ill remove UTAH if that little battle is lost in the war that is being won by equal rights:

1/5/14 Version 3.3


18 States with Equal Rights


Massachusetts - May 17, 2004
Connecticut - November 12, 2008
Iowa - April 27, 2009
Vermont - September 1, 2009
New Hampshire - January 1, 2010
Washing D.C. - March 9, 2010
FALL OF DADT Dec 18, 2010
New York - July 24, 2011
Washington - December 6, 2012
Maine - December 29, 2012
Maryland - January 1, 2013
FALL OF DOMA - June 26, 2013
California - June 28, 2013
Delaware - July 1, 2013
Rhode Island - August 1, 2013
Minnesota - August 1, 2013
New Jersey - October 21, 2013
Hawaii - December 2, 2013
New Mexico – December 19, 2013
Utah – December 20. 2013 (appealing to supreme court! :) )
Illinois - June 1, 2014 effective


21 States Working Towards Equal Rights


14 States with Pending Court Cases to Establish Equal Rights
Alaska (Suit to be filed this month)
Kentucky
Idaho
Louisiana
Michigan (Feb 2014 Trial)
Mississippi
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania (June 14 Trial)
South Carolina
Tennessee (Direct US Constitution Challenge)
Texas (Jan 2014 Trial, Direct US Constitution Challenge)
Virginia (two different suits, one involves Prop8 lawyers)
West Virginia


4 States with Court Case(s) and Legislation to establish Equal Rights
Arizona
Arkansas (Decesion Pending and 2016 ballot)
Nevada
Ohio (December 2013 trial) Trial had narrow ruling that ohio will recognize OTHER state marriages but didn’t impact bans. New cases expected.


3 States with Legislation to Establish Equal Rights
Colorado
Florida
Oregon


thats 39 states that could have equal rights by 2016 and some much sooner!
 
Back
Top Bottom