|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Cali Supreme Court ruling on legality of same-sex marriage ban | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
Are you saying that special laws for gays don't affect me? Come on, Rrhain, we've already covered this. Are you reading this thread carefully It would be more appropriate at this point to give the reference to the posts where you did cover this. That both shows that you have and hurries the conversation along. It also helps make the person you are disagreeing with look a tiny bit foolish too .
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
This would be a good place to wrap this just in case we get into technical difficulties with the thread.
How about a few summaries of positions? A good place for HM to list the infringements on his liberties too.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Seems there are only a few logical deductions to make here, at least in America. Marriage was started under religious pretenses a long, long time ago. It remained that way in America until the government stepped in, in the 1800's. That could be construed as an affront to the 1st Amendment, and thus marriage licenses and such are actually unconstitutional.
If they were to go this route, then any minister who claims to represent God could marry whomever they want and nobody could speak a word against it. The second route is to simply defer the decision to a state to decide for themselves, since the Constitution is silent about marriage.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
As a wrap-up statement I’ll repeat the points I’ve been arguing on this thread:
” Gays should be granted civil unions but not marriages under the law. ” Marriage has always meant a civil union between a man and a woman. ” There is no compelling reason to change the meaning of “marriage.” ” If the word “marriage” for heterosexual unions must remain in the law then the word “garriage” should be added for homosexual unions. ” Otherwise, take the word "marriage" out of the law and let the churches decide who gets "married." ” And no one should be called a bigot for opposing “same-sex marriage,” so long as homosexuals are allowed to get civilly united under the law. It’s been a queer thread. ”HM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
NJ writes:
Taking the law out of marriage is an impossible goal to achieve. This route would also make a lot of people mad, which seems to be the reason why more and more bigots seems to claim to support this goal. If they were to go this route, then any minister who claims to represent God could marry whomever they want and nobody could speak a word against it.
Here is the latest news on this matter. I've been pointing out this "scorch earth" policy for years regarding the stance some people have about removing marriage completely from the law. The only reason I can see people possibly supporting this scorch earth policy is because they don't want gay people to get married so they'd rather burn the whole institution down than let gay people get married.
Some California county clerks to refuse all marriage ceremonies to protest gay weddingsquote: This reminds me of southern states closing down all public schools in protest of desegregation. I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Hoot writes:
If my memory serves me right, you're the one that barged into my thread and used up the post number limit. It’s been a queer thread. I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Hoot Mon responds to me:
quote: There is no such contract. There can be only one contract as "separate but equal" is unconstitutional. It is silly to have to rewrite all the current laws to change the name. As soon as you start saying you were "garried" three times, then we'll know you're sincere. And you wonder why you keep getting tagged as a bigot.
quote: Yes. Do you have evidence otherwise? I've been asking you for it for days now.
quote: Really? Where?
quote: More carefully than you. It's why I know when a person mentions a case (Lawrence v. Texas), refers to one of the justices (Scalia), and provides a phrase in quotation format, then it's a quote from the case. Summary statement: There is no reason not to provide full equality in all areas, including marriage, to those who aren't straight. No exceptions. Anything else is bigotry. Rrhain Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
Rrhain writes:
But I'm not g-g-g-gay. Would you go for "fairied"? As soon as you start saying you were "garried" three times, then we'll know you're sincere. ”HM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
Taz writes:
Sorry.
If my memory serves me right, you're the one that barged into my thread and used up the post number limit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fosdick  Suspended Member (Idle past 5500 days) Posts: 1793 From: Upper Slobovia Joined: |
AdminNosy writes:
"Gay marriage" is like a handicap parking stall, except handicapped people don't choose to be handicapped. By legalizing "gay marriage" I would feel disenfranchised from my constitutional rights because I believe "marriage" should be between a man and woman. That's all I've got, Nosy”just my opinion and feelings on the matter. Who has anything more than that to bring to the table? It's all about opinions and feelings. A good place for HM to list the infringements on his liberties too. ”HM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
I've been pointing out this "scorch earth" policy for years regarding the stance some people have about removing marriage completely from the law. The only reason I can see people possibly supporting this scorch earth policy is because they don't want gay people to get married so they'd rather burn the whole institution down than let gay people get married. I don't think it was intended to be a scorched earth policy. It seems reasonable given the 1st Amendment. Whether it is reasonable or not, you also make a very good point. We can't undo the century of marriage being under government control at this point. Since that doesn't seem like a legitimate option, I think it should then either go down to a vote by the citizens in each state. Let the people decide what they want. That is, after all, how democracies work. We seem to be forgetting that ever-so-slowly. “I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4716 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Let the people decide what they want. That is, after all, how democracies work. We seem to be forgetting that ever-so-slowly. This is not a democracy, it is a constitutional republic. The people get to indirectly control their government's actions. Not use the government to abuse other people who happen to have different wants and needs. A Gay person should be allowed self determination as much as a straight person. No one is required to like it. No one is required to call it normal. No one is required to call it marriage except government workers who are employees of the Gay person as much as they are employees of the straight persons. If they don't like it they can quit. Me, I'll call it marriage because I've got a life of my own and won't be paying attention to to the Gay people. I will be paying attention to the bigots because they are sure to be screwing with me at some point. AbE: Oh wow! I'm more worried about being screwed by a bigot than I am by a homosexual. How's that for irony. Edited by lyx2no, : No reason given. Kindly There is a spider by the water pipe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Nem writes:
You seem to be forgetting that we went down this route regarding interracial marriage. Heck, we went down this route with segregation. Are you going to try to convince me now that interracial marriage ban and segregation in the various states that chose them were right and moral? Let the people decide what they want. That is, after all, how democracies work. We seem to be forgetting that ever-so-slowly. I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Hoot writes:
And I believe that christians should screw themselves in the rear end. Does this mean that I should go out and advocate a law banning christians from having vaginal sex? You decide. By legalizing "gay marriage" I would feel disenfranchised from my constitutional rights because I believe "marriage" should be between a man and woman. I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3291 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Calif. Battle Over Gay Marriage Raises Novel Legal Questions
quote: quote: quote: Edited by Taz, : fixed dbcodes I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass. |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024