U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:43 PM
 
Location: Salinas, CA
15,016 posts, read 4,795,880 times
Reputation: 8076

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
So, you want legal rights and privileges? Which ones are those?
Last time I heard, gay people work hard like most of us, pay taxes, vote, serve on juries, and now can serve legally in the military. That is my reason for supporting it. They have our duties and responsibilities. It is pure hypocrisy to deny them the same rights. You simply can't have it both ways. Simple common sense. Increasingly Americans are getting sensible about this issue and dropping the hypocrisy and hostility toward gay people.

 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:44 PM
 
17,297 posts, read 25,691,472 times
Reputation: 8567
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
No, it is not. They're lawyers, and the Constitution is written plain language, ergo, we, the people have equal footing and equal ability to read and understand.

It's a bunch of political appointees, who are supposed to SERVE us, not rule us.

It's always telling to see who surrenders their mind to political types, professing intellectual inferiority to their peers.


The Constitution is not the source of our rights. SOME of our rights are codified, but the founders were actually loathe to include a Bill of Rights, because maybe they knew 250 years later some armchair conlaw scholar on the internet would come along and think that if it wasn't in the constitution, it wasn't a right.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:46 PM
 
9,472 posts, read 5,900,496 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7 View Post
Easy. There is a rational basis for keeping marriage 1+1:

The marriage contract does not lend itself to more than one person + one person. Marriage confers over 1000 benefits, rights, privileges, responsibilities and immunities that under the present scheme simply cannot be 1+1+1+1+1...
What? What is your point, here? That it's inconvenient, so therefore, cannot be a right to polygamists, or to siblings? Or parent / progeny? Fail.


Quote:
Figure out how to make it work for more than 1+1, and suddenly there may NOT be a rational basis for keeping marriage 1+1. I just don't think those burdens can ever be overcome, however, so it's a non-issue. Perhaps those interested in plural marriage should do the leg work.
Wow, that's the weakest argument EVER.

Quote:
Now, what is the RATIONAL BASIS for keeping the marriage contract (which is all it is, as far as the government should be concerned), one man and one woman?
Because that's what it is. Marriage predates our nation, including our laws. Now, tell me how, again, as an institution of a man and woman, it was defective and needed changing so much that it needed to be reformed by force?

Quote:
What other contract can YOU identify that restricts parties based on their sex?
irrelevance.


Quote:
I refuse to believe anyone wants to marry their sibling. Besides personal aversion, however, I suppose I have no problem and no business interfering with those that do.
And this, my friends, is why I, as a conservative, resist the notion of "reforming" society by force. Eventually, we reach the point where there's no means of being a society. We're just hedonists pursuing money and and other people's money.

Quote:
If the law was changed to allow siblings to marry, it would have no bearing whatsoever on me or my life though, so I honestly do not care. Let the first brother-sister pair to want to marry bring a case and start down that road if they want to. Their situation has zero to do with gay marriage, which stands on its OWN merits and considerations.
Wow, we as a society were having a crisis of gayness, such that our society was crumbling because they could not mimic heterosexual people legally?

That's a truly creative argument. Horse manure, but creative.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:51 PM
 
Location: Salinas, CA
15,016 posts, read 4,795,880 times
Reputation: 8076
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
No, the supreme court is not the source of the Constitution. It is. My understanding is of equal importance to theirs. What, you think that SCOTUS doesn't act in violation of the Constitution to get what IT WANTS?

I'm sorry, but I do NOT surrender my intellect to some political appointees in robes. You might, but don't be critical of people who choose to think for themselves.
Sounds like you are getting a little obnoxious now. Take a deep breath. You were complaining about that type of behavior at the start of the thread.

The reality is the Supreme Court makes decisions about the Constitution and you are bound by those rulings, even those that you don't like. Just because you smugly refuse to acknowledge that has no bearing on the reality. I'll bet you have no problem with their rulings when you agree with them.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:52 PM
 
Location: Bandera, Texas
48 posts, read 47,803 times
Reputation: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
I'm sorry, but I do NOT surrender my intellect to some political appointees in robes. You might, but don't be critical of people who choose to think for themselves.
Are all your opinions base on not caving in or are they based on laws and the constitution?
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:53 PM
 
Location: Somewhere extremely awesome
3,024 posts, read 2,461,585 times
Reputation: 2312
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
Because that's what it is. Marriage predates our nation, including our laws. Now, tell me how, again, as an institution of a man and woman, it was defective and needed changing so much that it needed to be reformed by force?

...


And this, my friends, is why I, as a conservative, resist the notion of "reforming" society by force. Eventually, we reach the point where there's no means of being a society. We're just hedonists pursuing money and and other people's money.

...

Wow, we as a society were having a crisis of gayness, such that our society was crumbling because they could not mimic heterosexual people legally?
Translation: your argument is "I don't like it."
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:55 PM
 
9,472 posts, read 5,900,496 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7 View Post
A right can be regulated. Even speech and religion is regulated.
How? In what ways?

Quote:
People have the RIGHT TO VOTE.... it does not mean that the government cannot regulate who gets the right to vote.
Ok

Quote:
Felons, non-citizens, under age 18, people without valid ID... all citizens whose right to vote can be denied, curtailed, etc.
As I recall, rights are ONLY removed by adjudication - due process.

Felons: rights removed by trial.

Non-citizens: Our government does not exist to defend their rights.

under age 18: Judged incompetent. That doesn't stop some people wanting to lower the age to 17, 15, 11, etc. However, their rights belong to their parents or guardians.

People without a valid ID: Not denied anything. How can can an unidentified person be considered a citizen? This isn't a restriction on citizens right to vote.

I will even grant you that VISA's can appear to infringe on our right to travel. Except that borders matter.

Like it or not, we are going to have to determine who is a citizen and who is not. But, no class of individuals, nor any INDIVIDUAL can have his rights removed.

Which, you don't seem to get. We don't allow siblings to marry, for instance. That's a class of citizens. Ergo, the individual right just doesn't seem to exist.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:56 PM
 
9,472 posts, read 5,900,496 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharks With Lasers View Post
Translation: your argument is "I don't like it."
No, I didn't argue anything about why. I'm critiquing your logic.

You're making it up as you go.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Salinas, CA
15,016 posts, read 4,795,880 times
Reputation: 8076
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
What? What is your point, here? That it's inconvenient, so therefore, cannot be a right to polygamists, or to siblings? Or parent / progeny? Fail.




Wow, that's the weakest argument EVER.



Because that's what it is. Marriage predates our nation, including our laws. Now, tell me how, again, as an institution of a man and woman, it was defective and needed changing so much that it needed to be reformed by force?



irrelevance.




And this, my friends, is why I, as a conservative, resist the notion of "reforming" society by force. Eventually, we reach the point where there's no means of being a society. We're just hedonists pursuing money and and other people's money.



Wow, we as a society were having a crisis of gayness, such that our society was crumbling because they could not mimic heterosexual people legally?

That's a truly creative argument. Horse manure, but creative.
So calling other points of view "horse manure" or "weakest argument EVER" is not smug or obnoxious!?? Pot calling the kettle black.

I am thinking maybe you were just as obnoxious on that day as the liberal guy after reading some of your posts, but can't prove it for sure. You want your view respected, but give none to other opinions. I think your views have been thoroughly discredited by reason and facts and you chose to respond with angry name calling. I would be surprised if you changed any minds here.

That is all I have to say on this matter.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 07:57 PM
 
9,472 posts, read 5,900,496 times
Reputation: 2162
Quote:
Originally Posted by CodyMustang View Post
Are all your opinions base on not caving in or are they based on laws and the constitution?
Rephrase your question. I don't understand it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top