Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
View Poll Results: Where do you stand with gay marriage and gay sex?
I support the legalization same-sex marriages and I'm fine with gay sex. 60 54.55%
I support the legalization same-sex marriages and I'm not fine with gay sex. 10 9.09%
I don't support the legalization same-sex marriages and I'm fine with gay sex. 5 4.55%
I don't support the legalization same-sex marriages and I'm not fine with gay sex. 35 31.82%
Voters: 110. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:20 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,211,524 times
Reputation: 9895

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by smalltownblues View Post
No, but what does that have to do with your argument?
You said that we all have the same protections. But I obviously do not have the same protections since I can not get a legal civil marriage.

 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:23 PM
 
1,136 posts, read 942,479 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
You said that we all have the same protections. But I obviously do not have the same protections since I can not get a legal civil marriage.
I said that we have the same protections, but I didn't say that marriage was one of them -- that was you. And since YOU (not me) believe that argument, then you have to explain why you're OK with inheritance laws -- which were specifically the point of contention with a gay plaintiff and gay activists -- not extending to heterosexuals who aren't married.

You can keep trying, but you're going to keep failing at this.
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:24 PM
 
1,136 posts, read 942,479 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan View Post
People are free to vote how they want. Furthermore, if you denied someone baking a cake, I wouldn't care either. Quite frankly it's your financial loss, and someone elses financial gain.
Absolutely. So I take it you disagree with the federal judges invalidating anti-gay marriage laws in multiple states, as well as the passage of gay marriage laws via the judiciary in an unconstitutional manner in the other states?
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:30 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,211,524 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by smalltownblues View Post
I said that we have the same protections, but I didn't say that marriage was one of them -- that was you. And since YOU (not me) believe that argument, then you have to explain why you're OK with inheritance laws -- which were specifically the point of contention with a gay plaintiff and gay activists -- not extending to heterosexuals who aren't married.

You can keep trying, but you're going to keep failing at this.
We don't have the same protections. You have access to the protections of marriage, I do not.

As a single you already have the right to inherit your own property. Marriage benefits are JOINT benefits. They require 2 or more people.

Again. Heterosexuals that are not married have the option of getting married to gain those legal protections offered under marriage laws. Homosexuals do not have that option in many states. That is not equal protections of the laws.
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,211,524 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by smalltownblues View Post
Absolutely. So I take it you disagree with the federal judges invalidating anti-gay marriage laws in multiple states, as well as the passage of gay marriage laws via the judiciary in an unconstitutional manner in the other states?
Please show me where in the constitution it says that the judiciary is not responsible for judging the constitutionality of laws.

I know you are not going to answer, because you blow off anyone that asks you to back up your assertions.
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:34 PM
 
1,136 posts, read 942,479 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
We don't have the same protections.
Yeah, but that's probably because "protections" doesn't have anything to do with marriage. So ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
As a single you already have the right to inherit your own property.
Hm, so do single gays, then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Heterosexuals that are not married have the option of getting married
Irrelevant, since "equal protections" (as misused by you) are not contingent on any actions.
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:35 PM
 
1,136 posts, read 942,479 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Please show me where in the constitution it says that the judiciary is not responsible for judging the constitutionality of laws.

I know you are not going to answer, because you blow off anyone that asks you to back up your assertions.
Since marriage isn't in the Constitution, that sort of answers it all. By the way, you were wrong that I wasn't going to answer, so you're batting 1.000.
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,211,524 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by smalltownblues View Post
Yeah, but that's probably because "protections" doesn't have anything to do with marriage. So ...



Hm, so do single gays, then.



Irrelevant, since "equal protections" (as misused by you) are not contingent on any actions.
Marital protections do have everything to do with marriage.

I do not have the right to inherit my spouses and my joint property. See that 2 people. A couple. A single person doesn't have another person to inherit from, and if they do, they can go get married.

Equal protections of the laws do have to do with the laws they are linked to.
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
24,260 posts, read 14,211,524 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by smalltownblues View Post
Since marriage isn't in the Constitution, that sort of answers it all. By the way, you were wrong that I wasn't going to answer, so you're batting 1.000.
But you didn't answer the question that was asked, you made up a question then proceeded to answer the one you created.

Care to try again?
 
Old 04-10-2014, 01:49 PM
 
1,136 posts, read 942,479 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
See that 2 people. A couple.
Wow, we have rights that are contingent on two people? This is pretty amazing! It's almost like you just make up things at random and see if people will buy it. You wouldn't do that, would you?
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top