Breaking News: Supreme Court Has Chosen Not To Hear Any Of The 7 Marriage Equality Cases.

[JakeStarkey]

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "our class system has always created slavery."

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "microlendingl/business training
and building coops and schools . . .".

that have wiped out poverty and trafficking one region at a time.

"Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

 

[Pop23]

Procreation is something same sex couplings can't do.

Seems the demographic groups aren't equal to begin with.

And you again demonstrate your bigotry, and discrimination
. You insist that same sex couples are less valid than opposite sex couples, because they cannot procreate, and them insist, when it is pointed out that sterile opposite sex couples can't either, that this is different.

Why do you hate sterile people?

I don't hate sterile people

Are you claiming same sex coupling don't procreate due to sterility?

Crazy dood, absolutely crazy

What business is it of yours? If they want children, they can adopt.

So can opposite sex fertile couples, but same sex coupling cannot make a baby

Hmmmmmm, yep, huge difference, would you not agree?

See? You hate the sterile. Not only are you making a distinction between homosexuals, and straight people, but, with this very post, you are pointing out "fertile" couples. Why do you hate the infertile? Why do you hate people who have had hysterectomies? Why do you hate people who have had vasectomies?

I'll say it again, sterile or not, they belong a part of the opposite gender coupling demographic.

Are you trying to claim that same sex couples cannot procreate because they are sterile?

Truth is, the two groups are not even close to being equal. Not my word, but biology made it so.

Keep squirming. It's cute

 

[Pop23]

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "our class system has always created slavery."

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "microlendingl/business training
and building coops and schools . . .".

that have wiped out poverty and trafficking one region at a time.

"Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

So Jake votes in favor of giving the blind drivers licenses.

Got it

 

[JakeStarkey]

Above is an example of the disintegration of Pop into mental masturbation, which feels good for him but leads only to sterility of the same argument over and over and over, all of which leads to the his type of comment immediately above.

 

[Pop23]

The disintegration of Pop into mental masturbation, which feels good for him but leads only to sterility of the same argument over and over and over.

^^^^Jakeoffs ignoring me, but comments about me a lot.

Strange

 

[Carla_Danger]

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "our class system has always created slavery."

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "microlendingl/business training
and building coops and schools . . .".

that have wiped out poverty and trafficking one region at a time.

"Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

So Jake votes in favor of giving the blind drivers licenses.

Got it

Driving is a privilege.

 

[emilynghiem]

You don't get it, do you? State and church are separated, period. Ethics and values, atheist and theist, inform the basis for individual philosophies of government, yes, which can triumph only by the vote or by the court.

No one has any moral obligation to build consensus with those who are wrong in law.

ACA is legal. Marriage equality is legal.[/b[ No one has any obligation to carve out a "but corner" for those who disagree. That is not how our political system works.

These two sections in bold contradict each other.

1. ACA crosses over "separation of church and state"
where health care involves spiritual and religious beliefs.
Just because you do not recognize these beliefs equally:
a. right to health care through govt as a belief
b. right to free market health care as a choice by natural rights and freedoms that
govt cannot deprive without first proving that someone committed a crime
Doesn't mean these beliefs don't exist.
They are both CREEDS
And the Fourteenth Amendment protects against discrimination by CREED
but the ACA establishes no penalty for people who believe in paying under federal mandates
and penalizes those who believe in paying for health care through other means by free choice.

This can be passed as law and still discriminate by CREED.
Gay marriage BANS passed as law and still discriminate by CREED.
Slavery was protected by law and still discriminated,
and was only enforced because people BELIEVED in that institution.
The people who felt this was against their BELIEFS
were in the meantime having their equal freedom violated.

Just because a law is passed or courts rule in favor
doesn't mean that decision is perfectly lawful.

2. for marriage equality
as long as marriage is through the govt
then both beliefs about marriage should be equally accommodated to represent the public
which involves spiritual and religions beliefs

So the same reason the bans are not constitutional
neither is the establishment of gay marriage through the state
constitutional unless all citizens agree since religious beliefs are involved.

otherwise this violates separation of church and state
by favoring and establishing one view over th e other and discriminating by CREED

3. correction: this is how our govt DOES "NOT" WORK

this isn't working if one or both sides is either
risking or getting their beliefs violated by imposing the other beliefs through govt.

that is not equal protection of the law
but is discriminating by creed, by the govt favoring one side in a religious dispute.

so it is not constitutional, not unless all citizens under that
law agree since religious beliefs are involved.

Sorry I think the problem boils down to:
I recognize political beliefs as protected creeds
but others like you do not and feel it is within
govt jurisdiction to decide FOR people
while I hold it is unconstitutional, as it would be for religious beliefs.

I treat secular, political, personal and religious beliefs
equally as beliefs or creeds
so that I do not discriminate unfairly against someone
just because their beliefs are not part of a recognized group.

The Constitution does not just protect religious freedom
for only recognized religions or too many people would be left out.

To be fair and inclusive of all people equally under state jurisdiction,
it makes sense to me to interpret beliefs/creeds openly to
mean anyone's inherent beliefs, values or interests
so that person is protected equally by law regardless of label or creed.

I happen to find that interpretation is more consistent
and more respectful/inclusive of people regardless of views,
where I believe govt should be neutral and objective that way
in order to live up to Constitutional standards of law, equality and ethics.

If other people want to follow a lower standard, I cannot impose mine on them.
But likewise I request that they don't impose their lower standards on
me that violate my belief in equal protection of the laws for all people
based on consent of the governed. Where people don't consent,
I ask to resolve conflicts until they do agree it is settled,
to make sure no one's beliefs or interests are excluded violated or discriminated against.

If everyone did that, we'd have a saner more effective govt.

 

[Pop23]

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "our class system has always created slavery."

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "microlendingl/business training
and building coops and schools . . .".

that have wiped out poverty and trafficking one region at a time.

"Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

So Jake votes in favor of giving the blind drivers licenses.

Got it

Driving is a privilege.

That's the best you have?

LMAO

 

[Pop23]

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "our class system has always created slavery."

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "microlendingl/business training
and building coops and schools . . .".

that have wiped out poverty and trafficking one region at a time.

"Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

So Jake votes in favor of giving the blind drivers licenses.

Got it

Driving is a privilege.

That's the best you have?

LMAO

It's a license

 

[bodecea]

Why do you keep bring up incest and procreation?

Procreation is something same sex couplings can't do.

Seems the demographic groups aren't equal to begin with.

And you again demonstrate your bigotry, and discrimination
. You insist that same sex couples are less valid than opposite sex couples, because they cannot procreate, and them insist, when it is pointed out that sterile opposite sex couples can't either, that this is different.

Why do you hate sterile people?

I don't hate sterile people

Are you claiming same sex coupling don't procreate due to sterility?

Crazy dood, absolutely crazy

I'm saying that either procreation matters, or it doesn't. You don't get to pick and choose who procreation matters for, just because you happen to not like the behavior of one group. That is called discrimination.

Anyway you want to cut it, dood, you are a bigot.

That's your right. I just want you to be honest about it.

Why do we make a daughter/father marriage illegal if procreation does not matter?

And you again demonstrate your bigotry, and discrimination
. You insist that same sex couples are less valid than opposite sex couples, because they cannot procreate, and them insist, when it is pointed out that sterile opposite sex couples can't either, that this is different.

Why do you hate sterile people?

I don't hate sterile people

Are you claiming same sex coupling don't procreate due to sterility?

Crazy dood, absolutely crazy

What business is it of yours? If they want children, they can adopt.

So can opposite sex fertile couples, but same sex coupling cannot make a baby

Hmmmmmm, yep, huge difference, would you not agree?

See? You hate the sterile. Not only are you making a distinction between homosexuals, and straight people, but, with this very post, you are pointing out "fertile" couples. Why do you hate the infertile? Why do you hate people who have had hysterectomies? Why do you hate people who have had vasectomies?

I'll say it again, sterile or not, they belong a part of the opposite gender coupling demographic.

Are you trying to claim that same sex couples cannot procreate because they are sterile?

Truth is, the two groups are not even close to being equal. Not my word, but biology made it so.

Keep squirming. It's cute

What does coupling and procreation have to do with a legal marriage debate?

 

[Carla_Danger]

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "our class system has always created slavery."

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "microlendingl/business training
and building coops and schools . . .".

that have wiped out poverty and trafficking one region at a time.

"Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

So Jake votes in favor of giving the blind drivers licenses.

Got it

Driving is a privilege.

That's the best you have?

LMAO

It's a license

One that you must pass.

 

[Pop23]

Procreation is something same sex couplings can't do.

Seems the demographic groups aren't equal to begin with.

And you again demonstrate your bigotry, and discrimination
. You insist that same sex couples are less valid than opposite sex couples, because they cannot procreate, and them insist, when it is pointed out that sterile opposite sex couples can't either, that this is different.

Why do you hate sterile people?

I don't hate sterile people

Are you claiming same sex coupling don't procreate due to sterility?

Crazy dood, absolutely crazy

I'm saying that either procreation matters, or it doesn't. You don't get to pick and choose who procreation matters for, just because you happen to not like the behavior of one group. That is called discrimination.

Anyway you want to cut it, dood, you are a bigot.

That's your right. I just want you to be honest about it.

Why do we make a daughter/father marriage illegal if procreation does not matter?

I don't hate sterile people

Are you claiming same sex coupling don't procreate due to sterility?

Crazy dood, absolutely crazy

What business is it of yours? If they want children, they can adopt.

So can opposite sex fertile couples, but same sex coupling cannot make a baby

Hmmmmmm, yep, huge difference, would you not agree?

See? You hate the sterile. Not only are you making a distinction between homosexuals, and straight people, but, with this very post, you are pointing out "fertile" couples. Why do you hate the infertile? Why do you hate people who have had hysterectomies? Why do you hate people who have had vasectomies?

I'll say it again, sterile or not, they belong a part of the opposite gender coupling demographic.

Are you trying to claim that same sex couples cannot procreate because they are sterile?

Truth is, the two groups are not even close to being equal. Not my word, but biology made it so.

Keep squirming. It's cute

What does coupling and procreation have to do with a legal marriage debate?

Ask those that made incestuous marriage illegal. k?

 

[Pop23]

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "our class system has always created slavery."

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "microlendingl/business training
and building coops and schools . . .".

that have wiped out poverty and trafficking one region at a time.

"Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

So Jake votes in favor of giving the blind drivers licenses.

Got it

Driving is a privilege.

That's the best you have?

LMAO

It's a license

One that you must pass.

Demonstrating ability

 

[bodecea]

And you again demonstrate your bigotry, and discrimination
. You insist that same sex couples are less valid than opposite sex couples, because they cannot procreate, and them insist, when it is pointed out that sterile opposite sex couples can't either, that this is different.

Why do you hate sterile people?

I don't hate sterile people

Are you claiming same sex coupling don't procreate due to sterility?

Crazy dood, absolutely crazy

What business is it of yours? If they want children, they can adopt.

So can opposite sex fertile couples, but same sex coupling cannot make a baby

Hmmmmmm, yep, huge difference, would you not agree?

I don't give a shit who wants to procreate, who doesn't, or who can't or won't. When it becomes the law that we must procreate, in order to marry, you let me know.

And the blind should be granted drivers licenses.

Okey dokey then.

How, pray tell do you get that from this discussion?

A blind person does not meet the criteria for getting a license....seeing road signs, seeing traffic, being able to look both ways before pulling out of a cross street, etc.

What criteria to legal marriage does a gay person/couple not meet?

 

[emilynghiem]

1. "Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

2. We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

3. There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

Sure, I would like to see TRUE conflict resolution done through parties BEFORE elections and voting on laws.
I agree this would keep it orderly, especially where there are collective disagreements split by party.

Trouble is, we aren't fully resolving issues.
But I agree with you, using the party system organized around elections, yes that is where I would focus!

2. You said that we would always have these problems.
And I was trying to say that setting up a school system (for training people
in managing self-govt and conflict resolution locally)
would address these problems as they arise so we don't keep falling into the same conflicts.

3. No, the point is the opposite.
it is to organize sustainable structures locally so there is order.

Just like we have multiple states under one union.
or multiple cities or counties under one state.

localizing and teaching self-govt is the opposite of disintegration.
it is teaching how to integrate more fully without losing individual rights and representation.
it is about maximizing both the benefits of local govt and benefits of centralized federal govt
by not getting in conflict over their roles and jurisdiction but using each level effectively.

since systems, interests and populations will change over time,
to make this sustainable that is why I would tie in
govt and financial/legal training with schools
to educate and adapt to each community and generation.

Whatever problems or conflicts arise, this is studied and resolved
by the local community first, and sharing with other communities
if the problem is systemic or greater than one group can solve on its own.

if you catch conflicts or issues early, the more effectively this can be addressed.
we still keep the federal state and party structures, but use them all in harmony
to maximize our resources. and quit wasting on conflict trying to one up each other by domination.

 

[bodecea]

And you again demonstrate your bigotry, and discrimination
. You insist that same sex couples are less valid than opposite sex couples, because they cannot procreate, and them insist, when it is pointed out that sterile opposite sex couples can't either, that this is different.

Why do you hate sterile people?

I don't hate sterile people

Are you claiming same sex coupling don't procreate due to sterility?

Crazy dood, absolutely crazy

I'm saying that either procreation matters, or it doesn't. You don't get to pick and choose who procreation matters for, just because you happen to not like the behavior of one group. That is called discrimination.

Anyway you want to cut it, dood, you are a bigot.

That's your right. I just want you to be honest about it.

Why do we make a daughter/father marriage illegal if procreation does not matter?

What business is it of yours? If they want children, they can adopt.

So can opposite sex fertile couples, but same sex coupling cannot make a baby

Hmmmmmm, yep, huge difference, would you not agree?

See? You hate the sterile. Not only are you making a distinction between homosexuals, and straight people, but, with this very post, you are pointing out "fertile" couples. Why do you hate the infertile? Why do you hate people who have had hysterectomies? Why do you hate people who have had vasectomies?

I'll say it again, sterile or not, they belong a part of the opposite gender coupling demographic.

Are you trying to claim that same sex couples cannot procreate because they are sterile?

Truth is, the two groups are not even close to being equal. Not my word, but biology made it so.

Keep squirming. It's cute

What does coupling and procreation have to do with a legal marriage debate?

Ask those that made incestuous marriage illegal. k?

If laws against incestuous marriage bother you, you should start a campaign....don't you think? As for marriage....what does coupling and procreation have to do with a legal marriage debate?

(a hint on your "incestuous marriage" schtick....incest is illegal with or with out marriage....is being gay illegal with or without marriage?

 

[emilynghiem]

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "our class system has always created slavery."

A fallacy of false comparison of marriage equality "microlendingl/business training
and building coops and schools . . .".

that have wiped out poverty and trafficking one region at a time.

"Many programs of conflict resolution, restorative justice and restitution/healing" is done first and foremost in our political elections, within the shelter of the Constitution.

We are discussing marriage equality, not age inequality, school systems, or moving up socially.

There are not going to be a disintegration into multiple societies and communities with different laws and semi-autonomy.

So Jake votes in favor of giving the blind drivers licenses.

Got it

Driving is a privilege.

Hi Carla_Danger
Can you find the posts between M14 Shooter and Czernobog?
I asked can we distinguish between
* the civil marriage and process that is through the state/govt
* the spiritual beliefs and religious customs of marriage
that are the personal freedom of each person (inherent by human nature, not given by govt)
and not for the state/govt to mandate or regulate

if you keep focusing on the civil marriage through the govt,
as long as that is public policy then all the public has the right to be represented equally.
so if people do not agree on their personal beliefs, those do not belong in the hands of govt to decide.

people are equal on the level of religious beliefs
but this must remain either out of govt policy
or people must agree how to write the laws
to include all people's beliefs.

it is only fair, if beliefs in same sex marriage are included
so should beliefs that do not support this. so the laws
should be neutral or where people agree on them and don't impose on each other's beliefs.

 

[Carla_Danger]

So Jake votes in favor of giving the blind drivers licenses.

Got it

Driving is a privilege.

That's the best you have?

LMAO

It's a license

One that you must pass.

Demonstrating ability

Your silly argument has nothing to do with marriage.

 

[emilynghiem]

I don't hate sterile people

Are you claiming same sex coupling don't procreate due to sterility?

Crazy dood, absolutely crazy

I'm saying that either procreation matters, or it doesn't. You don't get to pick and choose who procreation matters for, just because you happen to not like the behavior of one group. That is called discrimination.

Anyway you want to cut it, dood, you are a bigot.

That's your right. I just want you to be honest about it.

Why do we make a daughter/father marriage illegal if procreation does not matter?

So can opposite sex fertile couples, but same sex coupling cannot make a baby

Hmmmmmm, yep, huge difference, would you not agree?

See? You hate the sterile. Not only are you making a distinction between homosexuals, and straight people, but, with this very post, you are pointing out "fertile" couples. Why do you hate the infertile? Why do you hate people who have had hysterectomies? Why do you hate people who have had vasectomies?

I'll say it again, sterile or not, they belong a part of the opposite gender coupling demographic.

Are you trying to claim that same sex couples cannot procreate because they are sterile?

Truth is, the two groups are not even close to being equal. Not my word, but biology made it so.

Keep squirming. It's cute

What does coupling and procreation have to do with a legal marriage debate?

Ask those that made incestuous marriage illegal. k?

If laws against incestuous marriage bother you, you should start a campaign....don't you think? As for marriage....what does coupling and procreation have to do with a legal marriage debate?

(a hint on your "incestuous marriage" schtick....incest is illegal with or with out marriage....is being gay illegal with or without marriage?

My question on this:
if it is NOT okay to use marriage to promote homosexual couples or parents as socially accepted as a norm
why is it OKAY to use marriage to promote heterosexual coupling and procreation

shouldn't govt stick to the secular civil contracts
and avoid being in the business of establishing ANY such social beliefs
that are personal and up to people not govt to endorse?

 

[JakeStarkey]

[My question on this:
if it is NOT okay to use marriage to promote homosexual couples or parents as socially accepted as a norm
why is it OKAY to use marriage to promote heterosexual coupling and procreation

shouldn't govt stick to the secular civil contracts
and avoid being in the business of establishing ANY such social beliefs
that are personal and up to people not govt to endorse?

As far as religion is concerned about marriage, it is no place in the public forum in making law.

I agree that civil unions can be registered as such rather than marriage, which be used equally by theists and atheists in calling their unions such.