North Carolina another state ban on same sex marriage struck down!
Posted on: October 11, 2014 - 8:47am
Offline
North Carolina another state ban on same sex marriage struck down!
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/same-sex-marriage-ban-overturned-in-north-carolina/
WAY TO GO NC!
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
- Login to post comments
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/same-sex-marriage-ban-overturned-in-north-carolina/
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
Thanks for fixing that once again.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Alaska has fallen as well. Sarah needs to move to Russia if she likes denying gays rights.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
I'm not shocked that the leaders of NC think that the rights of voters are being taken away. After all, those republicans worked really hard to take away the voting rights of all those poor black people and students.
I don't agree with the legal reasoning at all, but at least faulty reasoning is leading to more freedom rather than less for a change.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
LOL.
Bush was too stupid to blame.
I was ignorant enough at one time to be considered a racist but not any more.
What's faulty? Gays are citizens, they are not asking for special rights.
I know, they didn't stick "get rid of the minum wage" in the ruling.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Yes, they are asking for special rights. They want to be treated as equals.
I would explain it to you, but I know you haven't read the ruling, won't read the ruling and wouldn't comprehend it if you did. You would respond by calling me homophobic and probably racist too. I have posted previously at great length my problems with the prevailing legal arguments and suggested alternative arguments. I believe that courts overruling laws passed with overwhelming majorities in the popular vote with legal opinions that are a big stretch is dangerous precedent for the future. I get the impatience, but I fear it could come bite us in the ass in the future because the ruling amounts to the judge saying 'I believe this law is unfair and immoral, therefore it doesn't count'.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
Wow you are racist.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
I understand your point but just because the voters vote on something doesn't make it legal or just. Think about the process involved with this type of law? How does it get pushed through to the voters to have the chance to vote on it? Was there a power struggle or did a system filled with people with religious motivation push the item on to the ballot? Did money weigh in on this issue and help the cause? When it got to the ballot, was it really a legal and constitutional item to be voting on in the first place or was it just a religious point of view?
If you are saying the voters have the right to squash a persons natural, born with sexual orientation, which is not a choice but woven in to their DNA, with a simple item on the ballot you are really being ignorant, just as much as the pompous zealots.
So when the day comes when the same people vote to execute all atheists, you will be the first person to step up to the noose and say, "hey, they voted on it so it must be a legit point of view".
This is really an issue of "Tyranny of the Majority".
Nope, but sometimes I wonder about you
I am not the one who holds the position that people of one race are less capable of filling out bullshit government paperwork than those of another.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
Just because something isn't just doesn't mean it is illegal. There are many unjust laws.
The law was passed by both houses in the state legislature with overwhelming majorities. It was then put on the ballot to be ratified by the voters at large, which it was, again with a large majority of votes. Why, some of the largest support came from the blacks that you accuse the republicans of trying to prevent from voting.
There was substantial money spent on both sides, as there is with any substantial law. None of these questions have anything to do with the legality or legal discussion. The law was legally passed in a straightforward way. There is no dispute on that.
Historically, states have always had the authority to regulate who can and can't get married in their states. Some states cousins can get married, in others they can't. Some states you can get married at 16, others you have to wait until 18. Some states you can get married immediately upon getting the license, others you have to wait a certain period.
This isn't a question of sex. Sexual relations has already been to the Supreme Court and it has ruled that you can have sex with any number of consenting adults of any sex in whatever manner you all prefer. This is strictly speaking about the state regulating the legal benefits that are conferred by marriage- which for the most part are taxation benefits. Personally, I don't think there should be any benefits for being married over being single, but our society decided that there should be. That is unfair and unjust to all of us who learn from our mistakes, but it is certainly legal until I can convince enough of my fellow countrymen that government has no place in marriage at all. (Which will be never)
A red herring that shows you know as much about the issue as Brian. Like I said, I have already written several pages of pretty in depth amateur legal analysis stating my opinion of the legal argument and suggesting what I believe is the preferred alternative to avoid legislating judicially. Feel free to go back and read them. I even had a pretty good in depth and spirited discussion with some members who actually had a grasp of the legal arguments (I believe it was Zus and AIG, but don't quote me on that). I'm not really interested in having a mundane discussion fueled by hyperbole, red herrings and talking points.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
ugh, welcome to the hallmark of discourse these days. (that's not meant as a dig at digital, i just relate to this sentiment.)
"I have never felt comfortable around people who talk about their feelings for Jesus, or any other deity for that matter, because they are usually none too bright. . . . Or maybe 'stupid' is a better way of saying it; but I have never seen much point in getting heavy with either stupid people or Jesus freaks, just as long as they don't bother me. In a world as weird and cruel as this one we have made for ourselves, I figure anybody who can find peace and personal happiness without ripping off somebody else deserves to be left alone. They will not inherit the earth, but then neither will I. . . . And I have learned to live, as it were, with the idea that I will never find peace and happiness, either. But as long as I know there's a pretty good chance I can get my hands on either one of them every once in a while, I do the best I can between high spots."
--Hunter S. Thompson
I'm sure they are less capable because they are black, poor, uninformed, beaten, abused, mislead and uneducated or a student.
People should have the right to experience evolution and with out the poison of politics interupting the...
I'm too tired to continue playing. Sorry for misleading you.
lol