Down goes DOMA!!

[mudwhistle]

The equivalence?

I've asked a simple question....

Third time now....

Is it racist or not to be against interracial marriage?

Surely you have answered by now....have I missed it?

you and seawytch need to get off the conflation train, you asked me a question- I don't believe there is an equivalence, so, I asked you to explain it to me.....

You don't think there is an equivalence in discrimination? It sounds like you need to tell us how they aren't.

The whole purpose of marriage was to placate the Bible-thumpers to assure them that they wouldn't go to Hell.

Marriage has been going on for thousands of years but a legal contract or a marriage license has only been used for a few hundred years. Used to be all you did is say," you want to stay with me?" If she says yes and you consummate then you're married. Civilization is why marriage has become so legal.

 

[Trajan]

you and seawytch need to get off the conflation train, you asked me a question- I don't believe there is an equivalence, so, I asked you to explain it to me.....

You don't think there is an equivalence in discrimination? It sounds like you need to tell us how they aren't.

The whole purpose of marriage was to placate the Bible-thumpers to assure them that they wouldn't go to Hell.

Marriage has been going on for thousands of years but a legal contract or a marriage license has only been used for a few hundred years. Used to be all you did is say," you want to stay with me?" If she says yes and you consummate then you're married. Civilization is why marriage has become so legal.

The whole purpose of marriage was to placate the Bible-thumpers to assure them that they wouldn't go to Hell.

uhmmm what?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Mudwhistle is correct. Unwrap the religious trapping, and one has a contract.

Let the gays do what they want; they threaten no one.

 

[Seawytch]

you and seawytch need to get off the conflation train, you asked me a question- I don't believe there is an equivalence, so, I asked you to explain it to me.....

You don't think there is an equivalence in discrimination? It sounds like you need to tell us how they aren't.

nice try........well not really, you set up the corollary, you need to prove it.......the topic is doma.

If you can't just say so......

Me:

Against interracial marriage = bigot
Against same sex marriage = bigot

You:

Against interracial marriage = bigot
Against same sex marriage = not a bigot


It is you will have to explain how one is bigotry and the other is not.

 

[JoeB131]

Here's a more important question for those horrified by today's ruling.

I'm going to totally give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are not homophobic, a bigot, or even that bad of a person.

So tell me, why does it matter to you if the gays can get married now? How does that change your life in any way, shape or form?

 

[bodecea]

You don't think there is an equivalence in discrimination? It sounds like you need to tell us how they aren't.

nice try........well not really, you set up the corollary, you need to prove it.......the topic is doma.

If you can't just say so......

Me:

Against interracial marriage = bigot
Against same sex marriage = bigot

You:

Against interracial marriage = bigot
Against same sex marriage = not a bigot


It is you will have to explain how one is bigotry and the other is not.

Has Trajan committed to saying that being against interracial marriage is bigotry yet? I've not seen it.

 

[Seawytch]

nice try........well not really, you set up the corollary, you need to prove it.......the topic is doma.

If you can't just say so......

Me:

Against interracial marriage = bigot
Against same sex marriage = bigot

You:

Against interracial marriage = bigot
Against same sex marriage = not a bigot


It is you will have to explain how one is bigotry and the other is not.

Has Trajan committed to saying that being against interracial marriage is bigotry yet? I've not seen it.

Good point. He just said we were conflating the two. Interesting.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There is no conflation.

Bigotry is bigotry whether it be race or it be orientation.

If the religious right declares war against American culture, then the younger generations coming to power will isolate it, without influence or reputation.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Oh? How so? If being against gays marrying isn't bigoted, being against interracial marriage also must not be, right?

go ahead and marry

good luck......

Already did in 2008. Now my spouse gets a dependent ID though. How awesome is that?

nice try........well not really, you set up the corollary, you need to prove it.......the topic is doma.

If you can't just say so......

Me:

Against interracial marriage = bigot
Against same sex marriage = bigot

You:

Against interracial marriage = bigot
Against same sex marriage = not a bigot


It is you will have to explain how one is bigotry and the other is not.

Has Trajan committed to saying that being against interracial marriage is bigotry yet? I've not seen it.

The lame ‘let the states decide’ dodge should be coming soon, if it hasn’t already.

 

[RandallFlagg]

I'll be the first to run the "let the states decide" gambit. The SCOTUS ruling included Section 2

Section 2, which was not considered by the Supreme Court in the Windsor case, declares that states and territories of the United States have the right to deny recognition of same-sex marriages that originated in other states or territories.

Same-sex couples face several major problems that arise from Section 2 of DOMA. If a same-sex couple is married in Vermont, for example, and moves to Pennsylvania, their marriage is no longer valid.

Sec. 2 reads, “No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.”

Consider that a gay couple marries in New York, but then moves to a state where same-sex unions aren’t legal. Their marriage would then essentially (and potentially) not be legally recognized.

Clearly, there’s still much to be hashed out on the gay marriage front. Considering that the Supreme Court didn’t tackle this portion of the bill, it’s likely that another challenge could unfold down the road. The issue — which, like the DOMA marriage definition mandate that was overturned — involves states’ rights, is sure to carry with it a great deal of controversy.

So blame it on the SCOTUS for not seeing things your way.....give em a call and let the know of your disappointment.

 

[Seawytch]

I'll be the first to run the "let the states decide" gambit. The SCOTUS ruling included Section 2

Section 2, which was not considered by the Supreme Court in the Windsor case, declares that states and territories of the United States have the right to deny recognition of same-sex marriages that originated in other states or territories.

Same-sex couples face several major problems that arise from Section 2 of DOMA. If a same-sex couple is married in Vermont, for example, and moves to Pennsylvania, their marriage is no longer valid.

Sec. 2 reads, “No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.”

Consider that a gay couple marries in New York, but then moves to a state where same-sex unions aren’t legal. Their marriage would then essentially (and potentially) not be legally recognized.

Clearly, there’s still much to be hashed out on the gay marriage front. Considering that the Supreme Court didn’t tackle this portion of the bill, it’s likely that another challenge could unfold down the road. The issue — which, like the DOMA marriage definition mandate that was overturned — involves states’ rights, is sure to carry with it a great deal of controversy.

So blame it on the SCOTUS for not seeing things your way.....give em a call and let the know of your disappointment.

It would still be recognized by the federal government.

The SCOTUS punted, no doubt about it, but the challenges to section 2 are on the horizon. Heck, I have my eye on some lake living in Utah for my retirement years...maybe it'll be my case before the SCOTUS.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The states' rights approach will fail, of course.

Listen up, you far religious right. The upcoming generations think you are full of shit now and will isolate you completely in the future if you keep it up.

 

[freedombecki]

It's time to get a bulldozer and pipe in a back door to the treasury from here. They've already torn the American voting people away from their notice. They just don't care about the rest of us sitting here paying taxes for fiascos they rule into this country that were offenses to the founders and the majority of the American people today:

Gay people have been paying into Social Security all their lives, just like you and me.

And yet they have not been allowed to collect their FULL benefits like you and I can.

You have a lot of nerve bitching about them now being allowed the SAME YOU HAVE BEEN GETTING.

Tough bananas. Last time I looked at the Bill of Rights, I had the right to say what I thought.

 

[Noomi]

VERY BIG DECISION -- all federal rights have just been granted to same-sex couples.

The wording of this decision puts all anti-gay laws into jeopardy.

Excellent news to wake up to! Well done you guys!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It's time to get a bulldozer and pipe in a back door to the treasury from here. They've already torn the American voting people away from their notice. They just don't care about the rest of us sitting here paying taxes for fiascos they rule into this country that were offenses to the founders and the majority of the American people today:

Gay people have been paying into Social Security all their lives, just like you and me.

And yet they have not been allowed to collect their FULL benefits like you and I can.

You have a lot of nerve bitching about them now being allowed the SAME YOU HAVE BEEN GETTING.

Tough bananas. Last time I looked at the Bill of Rights, I had the right to say what I thought.

You do.

You just don’t have the right to codify it.

 

[RandallFlagg]

It's time to get a bulldozer and pipe in a back door to the treasury from here. They've already torn the American voting people away from their notice. They just don't care about the rest of us sitting here paying taxes for fiascos they rule into this country that were offenses to the founders and the majority of the American people today:

Gay people have been paying into Social Security all their lives, just like you and me.

And yet they have not been allowed to collect their FULL benefits like you and I can.

You have a lot of nerve bitching about them now being allowed the SAME YOU HAVE BEEN GETTING.

Tough bananas. Last time I looked at the Bill of Rights, I had the right to say what I thought.

Trust me. If the very same people that have won a victory today have their way...not for much longer.

 

[mudwhistle]

Obama said yesterday that he wasn't planning on forcing churches to marry Gays, which means that is exactly what he's planning on doing.

I suspect they'll get a letter which states their 501c status is under review and their tax-free status is contingent on specific criteria.

 

[mudwhistle]

Btw, the pastor I asked to do my nuptials had a stand in do it because he didn't agree with it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Btw, the pastor I asked to do my nuptials had a stand in do it because he didn't agree with it.

Why?

 

[Dot Com]

It's time to get a bulldozer and pipe in a back door to the treasury from here. They've already torn the American voting people away from their notice. They just don't care about the rest of us sitting here paying taxes for fiascos they rule into this country that were offenses to the founders and the majority of the American people today:

Gay people have been paying into Social Security all their lives, just like you and me.

And yet they have not been allowed to collect their FULL benefits like you and I can.

You have a lot of nerve bitching about them now being allowed the SAME YOU HAVE BEEN GETTING.

Tough bananas. Last time I looked at the Bill of Rights, I had the right to say what I thought.

"tough banannas"? ever heard of equal protection? You have enough hate in you for 3 people