60 Percent Of Americans Soon Will Live In States With Marriage Equality

[Redfish]

FYI...Jews make up about 2.5% of the population. Are they the people seeking equal rights you are currently whining about?

No. Are you not following the discussion? Or are you just obsessed with the Jews?

You ignore my point with/for the opportunity to illustrate unrelated intolerance?

Libs are so predictable.

Where did I whine?

Why do you ignore the majority population, or the constitutional rights of individuals? Millions just lost their voice, vote and rights (hate to repeat myself, but I must), for the sake of a very small minority that is misrepresented in popular culture/politics/ideology.

I think you missed my point altogether.

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

He knows they can't, he just WANTS them to be able to.

In contrast, you want the minority to vote away the rights of the majority---------can't you see that?

There is no right being taken away from bigots.

you are correct, you bigots are not having any rights taken from you by the US constitution and statutes.

 

[Seawytch]

FYI...Jews make up about 2.5% of the population. Are they the people seeking equal rights you are currently whining about?

No. Are you not following the discussion? Or are you just obsessed with the Jews?

You ignore my point with/for the opportunity to illustrate unrelated intolerance?

Libs are so predictable.

Where did I whine?

Why do you ignore the majority population, or the constitutional rights of individuals? Millions just lost their voice, vote and rights (hate to repeat myself, but I must), for the sake of a very small minority that is misrepresented in popular culture/politics/ideology.

I think you missed my point altogether.

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

 

[bodecea]

FYI...Jews make up about 2.5% of the population. Are they the people seeking equal rights you are currently whining about?

No. Are you not following the discussion? Or are you just obsessed with the Jews?

You ignore my point with/for the opportunity to illustrate unrelated intolerance?

Libs are so predictable.

Where did I whine?

Why do you ignore the majority population, or the constitutional rights of individuals? Millions just lost their voice, vote and rights (hate to repeat myself, but I must), for the sake of a very small minority that is misrepresented in popular culture/politics/ideology.

I think you missed my point altogether.

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

Marriage isn't mentioned in the Constitution, however, in the 14th amendment it states that the government must treat all law-abiding, tax-paying citizens equally. So......if the State is giving legal marriage licenses to one group of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens, it must treat all equally and not discriminate based on gender.

The government has two choices...take legal marriage off the table completely for ALL....or provide legal marriage to ALL (and by ALL, I mean all law-abiding, tax-paying citizens, of course)

 

[bodecea]

No. Are you not following the discussion? Or are you just obsessed with the Jews?

You ignore my point with/for the opportunity to illustrate unrelated intolerance?

Libs are so predictable.

Where did I whine?

Why do you ignore the majority population, or the constitutional rights of individuals? Millions just lost their voice, vote and rights (hate to repeat myself, but I must), for the sake of a very small minority that is misrepresented in popular culture/politics/ideology.

I think you missed my point altogether.

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

He also seems to think the Constitution and the Government GIVES us our rights.

 

[Seawytch]

No. Are you not following the discussion? Or are you just obsessed with the Jews?

You ignore my point with/for the opportunity to illustrate unrelated intolerance?

Libs are so predictable.

Where did I whine?

Why do you ignore the majority population, or the constitutional rights of individuals? Millions just lost their voice, vote and rights (hate to repeat myself, but I must), for the sake of a very small minority that is misrepresented in popular culture/politics/ideology.

I think you missed my point altogether.

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

He knows they can't, he just WANTS them to be able to.

In contrast, you want the minority to vote away the rights of the majority---------can't you see that?

There is no right being taken away from bigots.

you are correct, you bigots are not having any rights taken from you by the US constitution and statutes.

Gays are not the ones trying to keep a fundamental right from a minority group Fishy, you are. That makes you an unadulterated bigot. There is no right you are losing by my legal, civil marriage...which by the way will be celebrating its 6th anniversary at the end of this month.

 

[Redfish]

No. Are you not following the discussion? Or are you just obsessed with the Jews?

You ignore my point with/for the opportunity to illustrate unrelated intolerance?

Libs are so predictable.

Where did I whine?

Why do you ignore the majority population, or the constitutional rights of individuals? Millions just lost their voice, vote and rights (hate to repeat myself, but I must), for the sake of a very small minority that is misrepresented in popular culture/politics/ideology.

I think you missed my point altogether.

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

you and bodeica are gay. I get that. I understand that you want society to ratify your sexual preference for the same sex.

but get off the Loving case as precedent, that was a man and a woman of different races, not a same sex couple------------------its not a valid analogy or precedent.

The question is whether the government should mandate societal acceptance of gay unions and call them marriages OR whether the government should provide equal rights to gay couples using a different word for their unions.

I want you to have equal rights in every way as a man/woman marriage.

You are hung up on the word, not equality. Admit that, and then we can move on. Until then this entire discussion is like standing on the deck of a ship and pissing into the wind and wondering why your shoes are wet.

 

[Redfish]

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

He also seems to think the Constitution and the Government GIVES us our rights.

Rights come from God. The constitution makes them enforceable by men.

 

[Redfish]

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

He knows they can't, he just WANTS them to be able to.

In contrast, you want the minority to vote away the rights of the majority---------can't you see that?

There is no right being taken away from bigots.

you are correct, you bigots are not having any rights taken from you by the US constitution and statutes.

Gays are not the ones trying to keep a fundamental right from a minority group Fishy, you are. That makes you an unadulterated bigot. There is no right you are losing by my legal, civil marriage...which by the way will be celebrating its 6th anniversary at the end of this month.

congratulations. I'm glad it works for you. Would it be less of a committment if the state called it a civil union?

What will you say when the ACLU takes a bigamy or polygamy case to SCOTUS using Cal gay marriage laws as precedent? They will claim that the rights of bigamists and polygamists are being denied because they can't marry who they choose---------------it will happen, I guarantee it. What will you say then? Will that be good for society? Do you want your kids to marry into a multi person marriage? THINK !

 

[Seawytch]

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

you and bodeica are gay. I get that. I understand that you want society to ratify your sexual preference for the same sex.

but get off the Loving case as precedent, that was a man and a woman of different races, not a same sex couple------------------its not a valid analogy or precedent.

The question is whether the government should mandate societal acceptance of gay unions and call them marriages OR whether the government should provide equal rights to gay couples using a different word for their unions.

I want you to have equal rights in every way as a man/woman marriage.

You are hung up on the word, not equality. Admit that, and then we can move on. Until then this entire discussion is like standing on the deck of a ship and pissing into the wind and wondering why your shoes are wet.

Sorry fishy but discrimination is discrimination. Bigots of yore did it based on skin color, you're doing it based on gender. No difference in the discrimination.

That it was "man/woman" marriage has nothing to do with your contention that the majority should be voting on the rights of the minority. The majority was STRONGLY against interracial marriage when the SCOTUS ruled. The majority actually favors marriage equality and the SCOTUS has yet to hear any of the cases.

I already have the equal rights (almost) thanks anyway. If you don't like that I have a civil marriage, then you change the name for all civil marriages, not just mine, bigot.

 

[bodecea]

He knows they can't, he just WANTS them to be able to.

In contrast, you want the minority to vote away the rights of the majority---------can't you see that?

There is no right being taken away from bigots.

you are correct, you bigots are not having any rights taken from you by the US constitution and statutes.

Gays are not the ones trying to keep a fundamental right from a minority group Fishy, you are. That makes you an unadulterated bigot. There is no right you are losing by my legal, civil marriage...which by the way will be celebrating its 6th anniversary at the end of this month.

congratulations. I'm glad it works for you. Would it be less of a committment if the state called it a civil union?

What will you say when the ACLU takes a bigamy or polygamy case to SCOTUS using Cal gay marriage laws as precedent? They will claim that the rights of bigamists and polygamists are being denied because they can't marry who they choose---------------it will happen, I guarantee it. What will you say then? Will that be good for society? Do you want your kids to marry into a multi person marriage? THINK !

Civil Union for ALL legal marriages, right?

(But, too bad....that was tried and it was the RW that shot that one down)

 

[Seawytch]

He knows they can't, he just WANTS them to be able to.

In contrast, you want the minority to vote away the rights of the majority---------can't you see that?

There is no right being taken away from bigots.

you are correct, you bigots are not having any rights taken from you by the US constitution and statutes.

Gays are not the ones trying to keep a fundamental right from a minority group Fishy, you are. That makes you an unadulterated bigot. There is no right you are losing by my legal, civil marriage...which by the way will be celebrating its 6th anniversary at the end of this month.

congratulations. I'm glad it works for you. Would it be less of a committment if the state called it a civil union?

What will you say when the ACLU takes a bigamy or polygamy case to SCOTUS using Cal gay marriage laws as precedent? They will claim that the rights of bigamists and polygamists are being denied because they can't marry who they choose---------------it will happen, I guarantee it. What will you say then? Will that be good for society? Do you want your kids to marry into a multi person marriage? THINK !

Actually, it was already well "committed" long before we got civil married or civilly unioned (yeah, we did that first) We've been together going on 20 years thanks.

If YOU really believe that polygamy is going to happen, that's your hangup and if they do ever get the right to civilly marry more than one person (which would actually change laws, unlike same sex marriage which only adds gay couples to it), it will have nothing to do with my right to civilly marry the non familial consenting adult partner of my choice.

Can you name the countries that recognize both legal polygamy and same sex marriage.

 

[Redfish]

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

you and bodeica are gay. I get that. I understand that you want society to ratify your sexual preference for the same sex.

but get off the Loving case as precedent, that was a man and a woman of different races, not a same sex couple------------------its not a valid analogy or precedent.

The question is whether the government should mandate societal acceptance of gay unions and call them marriages OR whether the government should provide equal rights to gay couples using a different word for their unions.

I want you to have equal rights in every way as a man/woman marriage.

You are hung up on the word, not equality. Admit that, and then we can move on. Until then this entire discussion is like standing on the deck of a ship and pissing into the wind and wondering why your shoes are wet.

Sorry fishy but discrimination is discrimination. Bigots of yore did it based on skin color, you're doing it based on gender. No difference in the discrimination.

That it was "man/woman" marriage has nothing to do with your contention that the majority should be voting on the rights of the minority. The majority was STRONGLY against interracial marriage when the SCOTUS ruled. The majority actually favors marriage equality and the SCOTUS has yet to hear any of the cases.

I already have the equal rights (almost) thanks anyway. If you don't like that I have a civil marriage, then you change the name for all civil marriages, not just mine, bigot.

go screw yourself. trying to have is civil discussion with you is like trying to discuss quantum mathematics with a snail.

your entire existence revolves around your sexual preference, nothing else matters to you. You are a perfect example of why there is so much resistence from the majority in the world to gay marriage.

You libs love muslims so much, why not take your gay marriage to Iran, you would cease to exist in about 2 hours.

 

[Seawytch]

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

you and bodeica are gay. I get that. I understand that you want society to ratify your sexual preference for the same sex.

but get off the Loving case as precedent, that was a man and a woman of different races, not a same sex couple------------------its not a valid analogy or precedent.

The question is whether the government should mandate societal acceptance of gay unions and call them marriages OR whether the government should provide equal rights to gay couples using a different word for their unions.

I want you to have equal rights in every way as a man/woman marriage.

You are hung up on the word, not equality. Admit that, and then we can move on. Until then this entire discussion is like standing on the deck of a ship and pissing into the wind and wondering why your shoes are wet.

Sorry fishy but discrimination is discrimination. Bigots of yore did it based on skin color, you're doing it based on gender. No difference in the discrimination.

That it was "man/woman" marriage has nothing to do with your contention that the majority should be voting on the rights of the minority. The majority was STRONGLY against interracial marriage when the SCOTUS ruled. The majority actually favors marriage equality and the SCOTUS has yet to hear any of the cases.

I already have the equal rights (almost) thanks anyway. If you don't like that I have a civil marriage, then you change the name for all civil marriages, not just mine, bigot.

go screw yourself. trying to have is civil discussion with you is like trying to discuss quantum mathematics with a snail.

your entire existence revolves around your sexual preference, nothing else matters to you. You are a perfect example of why there is so much resistence from the majority in the world to gay marriage.

You libs love muslims so much, why not take your gay marriage to Iran, you would cease to exist in about 2 hours.

No, my existence pretty much revolves around my family, but it's sweet of you to be concerned.

I don't love Muslims...but I don't hate them either and I guess that's the same thing in a bigots eyes.

Would you like me to move to Iran or would you like to bring their policies here?

 

[bodecea]

You seem to think the majority are allowed to vote away the rights of the minority....do you?

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

you and bodeica are gay. I get that. I understand that you want society to ratify your sexual preference for the same sex.

but get off the Loving case as precedent, that was a man and a woman of different races, not a same sex couple------------------its not a valid analogy or precedent.

The question is whether the government should mandate societal acceptance of gay unions and call them marriages OR whether the government should provide equal rights to gay couples using a different word for their unions.

I want you to have equal rights in every way as a man/woman marriage.

You are hung up on the word, not equality. Admit that, and then we can move on. Until then this entire discussion is like standing on the deck of a ship and pissing into the wind and wondering why your shoes are wet.

So...you wouldn't mind if we wanted you to have equal rights in every way as a man/man marriage....ok.

 

[bodecea]

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

you and bodeica are gay. I get that. I understand that you want society to ratify your sexual preference for the same sex.

but get off the Loving case as precedent, that was a man and a woman of different races, not a same sex couple------------------its not a valid analogy or precedent.

The question is whether the government should mandate societal acceptance of gay unions and call them marriages OR whether the government should provide equal rights to gay couples using a different word for their unions.

I want you to have equal rights in every way as a man/woman marriage.

You are hung up on the word, not equality. Admit that, and then we can move on. Until then this entire discussion is like standing on the deck of a ship and pissing into the wind and wondering why your shoes are wet.

Sorry fishy but discrimination is discrimination. Bigots of yore did it based on skin color, you're doing it based on gender. No difference in the discrimination.

That it was "man/woman" marriage has nothing to do with your contention that the majority should be voting on the rights of the minority. The majority was STRONGLY against interracial marriage when the SCOTUS ruled. The majority actually favors marriage equality and the SCOTUS has yet to hear any of the cases.

I already have the equal rights (almost) thanks anyway. If you don't like that I have a civil marriage, then you change the name for all civil marriages, not just mine, bigot.

go screw yourself. trying to have is civil discussion with you is like trying to discuss quantum mathematics with a snail.

your entire existence revolves around your sexual preference, nothing else matters to you. You are a perfect example of why there is so much resistence from the majority in the world to gay marriage.

You libs love muslims so much, why not take your gay marriage to Iran, you would cease to exist in about 2 hours.

No, my existence pretty much revolves around my family, but it's sweet of you to be concerned.

I don't love Muslims...but I don't hate them either and I guess that's the same thing in a bigots eyes.

Would you like me to move to Iran or would you like to bring their policies here?

Ah...I see Redfish went to the old "You should be grateful we don't kill you like the Muslims do" gambit.

 

[Unkotare]

Marriage rate drops to lowest in a century study - NY Daily News


Warning Bell for Developed Countries Declining Birth Rates - Forbes

 

[bodecea]

what you don't get is that minority rights are established by majority vote. the provisions of the constitution were put in place by a majority vote of the states.

you are misstating the entire issue.

So you are saying that the majority GIVES rights to the minority by voting them rights?

No, rights are given to everyone equally. Thats the way our system works.

marriage is not a right under the constitution---------------if you think it is, quote the language.

So you think the only rights you have are enumerated in the Constitution eh? Where is your right to interstate or intrastate travel in the Constitution? How about your right to privacy? Where is that specifically enumerated in the constitution? Marriage as a fundamental right has been determined by the SCOTUS on more than one occasion. Look up these laws and you will see the actual words "fundamental right".

Loving v Virginia
Zablocki v Redhail
Turner v Safley

He also seems to think the Constitution and the Government GIVES us our rights.

Rights come from God. The constitution makes them enforceable by men.

So one doesn't get rights if one doesn't believe in your "god"?

 

[bodecea]

Marriage rate drops to lowest in a century study - NY Daily News


Warning Bell for Developed Countries Declining Birth Rates - Forbes

And.....?

 

[Seawytch]

Marriage rate drops to lowest in a century study - NY Daily News


Warning Bell for Developed Countries Declining Birth Rates - Forbes

And.....?

It's the gays fault, naturally.

And they wonder why they're losing.

 

[Kosh]

It is time to get the government out of the business of "marriage".