Gay-Sex Marriage "Settled"..Who Decides Polygamy (Polyamory) Next?

[jillian]

This ball is rolling right back into SCOTUS' court and they will have to parse out exactly what makes polyamorous-Americans intrinsically different than homosexual-Americans; as to the new class they just created out of thin air June 26, 2015. That conversation of course will lead to how homosexuals and polygamists are identified only by behaviors...which will lead to ..."how do we decide which behaviors have rights and which don't"...which will lead to "is this limited just to sexuality or can other behaviors now petition?"...which will lead to "wait a minute, are we now going to have to sit on and decide every question of law regarding human behaviors"?
And I'm going to be tickled pink watching this overreaching and treacherous Court chase its own tail round and round and round..

The founding fathers knew what they were doing. And this is why they made it perfectly clear that the US Supreme Court's mere 9 members were not qualified to legislate for the 300 million who regulate human behaviors locally, at the state level. Their June 26, 2015 Ruling was new legislation added to the Constitution. Even a pinhead flunkie of poli-sci knows that means it's not worth the paper it's written on. Only Congress may Amend the Constitution. And only a pinhead flunkie of basic logical deduction wouldn't know that polygamy is already legal by the Court's June 26, 2015 Ruling based on ...*drum roll* equality...

what ball is rolling back to the Court? is there even a case pending at this time?

the Court did not legislate. it ruled on whether something was constitutional. that's what the Court does.

go read loving v Virginia and maybe a book or two on constitutional construction.

thanks.

 

[mdk]

As long as men have a locker room in which to shower, this does not go against public accommodation laws as both are being accommodated. Your fantasies about what happens in the women's locker rooms are just that, your fantasies. Lol.

You better check the law on discrimination based on sex, and on sexual identification.

But better yet, listen to you, arguing for...........,


Wait for it..........








Seperate but EQUAL


You simply can't argue that it's bad public policy EXCEPT for...........

Answer my question. How does two gay people being married effect you in any way?

Gays could always marry, do you not understand the law or your own argument?

Blonde?

And that lame argument has lost in almost every single courthouse across the nation. You're free to be as obtuse as you wish but don't expect the rest for follow your example.

Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record

That running noise is MDK running from providing the link.

You need a link to confirm common knowledge? All marriage licenses are a matter of public record. Are you going to demand a link that water is wet next? lol.


No, that noise you hear is you stomping you feet. I am done playing your silly games for the day.

 

[Pop23]

This ball is rolling right back into SCOTUS' court and they will have to parse out exactly what makes polyamorous-Americans intrinsically different than homosexual-Americans; as to the new class they just created out of thin air June 26, 2015. That conversation of course will lead to how homosexuals and polygamists are identified only by behaviors...which will lead to ..."how do we decide which behaviors have rights and which don't"...which will lead to "is this limited just to sexuality or can other behaviors now petition?"...which will lead to "wait a minute, are we now going to have to sit on and decide every question of law regarding human behaviors"?
And I'm going to be tickled pink watching this overreaching and treacherous Court chase its own tail round and round and round..

The founding fathers knew what they were doing. And this is why they made it perfectly clear that the US Supreme Court's mere 9 members were not qualified to legislate for the 300 million who regulate human behaviors locally, at the state level. Their June 26, 2015 Ruling was new legislation added to the Constitution. Even a pinhead flunkie of poli-sci knows that means it's not worth the paper it's written on. Only Congress may Amend the Constitution. And only a pinhead flunkie of basic logical deduction wouldn't know that polygamy is already legal by the Court's June 26, 2015 Ruling based on ...*drum roll* equality...

what ball is rolling back to the Court? is there even a case pending at this time?

the Court did not legislate. it ruled on whether something was constitutional. that's what the Court does.

go read loving v Virginia and maybe a book or two on constitutional construction.

thanks.

Yes, and there is a thread devoted to it.

 

[ChrisL]

Yes, so now we know who are married lesbians, allowed to shower in a gym together.

What a bitch that creates to public accomodations laws when a straight couple cannot.

You thought the baker was hit with a heavy fine, imagine the fine a huge corporation will take! And the attorney will make a friggin MINT!

As long as men have a locker room in which to shower, this does not go against public accommodation laws as both are being accommodated. Your fantasies about what happens in the women's locker rooms are just that, your fantasies. Lol.

You better check the law on discrimination based on sex, and on sexual identification.

But better yet, listen to you, arguing for...........,


Wait for it..........








Seperate but EQUAL


You simply can't argue that it's bad public policy EXCEPT for...........

Answer my question. How does two gay people being married effect you in any way?

Gays could always marry, do you not understand the law or your own argument?

Blonde?

And that lame argument has lost in almost every single courthouse across the nation. You're free to be as obtuse as you wish but don't expect the rest for follow your example.

The hateful people think that laws that recognize equality amongst people are an insult to them.

 

[Pop23]

You better check the law on discrimination based on sex, and on sexual identification.

But better yet, listen to you, arguing for...........,


Wait for it..........








Seperate but EQUAL


You simply can't argue that it's bad public policy EXCEPT for...........

Answer my question. How does two gay people being married effect you in any way?

Gays could always marry, do you not understand the law or your own argument?

Blonde?

And that lame argument has lost in almost every single courthouse across the nation. You're free to be as obtuse as you wish but don't expect the rest for follow your example.

Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record

That running noise is MDK running from providing the link.

You need a link to confirm common knowledge? All marriage licenses are a matter of public record. Are you going to demand a link that water is wet next? lol.


No, that noise you hear is you stomping you feet. I am done playing your silly games for the day.

You made the claim, back it up with a link as requested. That's how this works.

I've spoken to a civil rights attorney and he can't see a flaw in my legal argument, you claim there is.

Back it up with a link.

 

[Pop23]

As long as men have a locker room in which to shower, this does not go against public accommodation laws as both are being accommodated. Your fantasies about what happens in the women's locker rooms are just that, your fantasies. Lol.

You better check the law on discrimination based on sex, and on sexual identification.

But better yet, listen to you, arguing for...........,


Wait for it..........








Seperate but EQUAL


You simply can't argue that it's bad public policy EXCEPT for...........

Answer my question. How does two gay people being married effect you in any way?

Gays could always marry, do you not understand the law or your own argument?

Blonde?

And that lame argument has lost in almost every single courthouse across the nation. You're free to be as obtuse as you wish but don't expect the rest for follow your example.

The hateful people think that laws that recognize equality amongst people are an insult to them.

Sorry?, you're the one arguing FOR seperate but equal.

You are blonde!

 

[WorldWatcher]

Just publish the names and addresses of all couples that have filed for a marriage license. Make it a matter of public record.

They are already a matter of public record. Marriage licenses are open records.

Feel free to go to your county clerk, copy the names and address and then pay for newpaper space to publsh the result.

Or, how about an individual bakery publishing the customer list of every couple asking for a wedding cake.

They can already do that.

(Not saying any do, since a baker that did that probably wouldn't have very many customers. They might also be liable for bad things that happen to those customers. My wife has an ex-boyfriend that was very violent and as a result we have always been very careful about public records. If something happened to my wife by this person and it was traced back to the baker not protecting personal information - I'd sue the crap out of them in Civil Court and do everything I could to ruin their life. Any monetary award would be donated to a woman shelter since it wouldn't be about money.)


>>>>

 

[Pop23]

Just publish the names and addresses of all couples that have filed for a marriage license. Make it a matter of public record.

They are already a matter of public record. Marriage licenses are open records.

Feel free to go to your county clerk, copy the names and address and then pay for newpaper space to publsh the result.

Or, how about an individual bakery publishing the customer list of every couple asking for a wedding cake.

They can already do that.

(Not saying any do, since a baker that did that probably wouldn't have very many customers. They might also be liable for bad things that happen to those customers. My wife has an ex-boyfriend that was very violent and as a result we have always been very careful about public records. If something happened to my wife by this person and it was traced back to the baker not protecting personal information - I'd sue the crap out of them in Civil Court and do everything I could to ruin their life. Any monetary award would be donated to a woman shelter since it wouldn't be about money.)


>>>>

Curious WorldWatcher, your opinion as to any justification you might have to why gay married couples have greater access to public accomodations laws than straight couples?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record

Whether "gay married" couples names are available is irrelevant.

It's "married" couples. There is no separate list for "straight married couples" verses "gay married couples". They are all just "married.

Here is a link to the Virginia Office of Vital Records which has a link to web search going back to 1912 -->> Office of Vital Records


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Curious WorldWatcher, your opinion as to any justification you might have to why gay married couples have greater access to public accomodations laws than straight couples?

There are no public accommodation laws that list "gay" as a criteria.


>>>>

 

[jillian]

This ball is rolling right back into SCOTUS' court and they will have to parse out exactly what makes polyamorous-Americans intrinsically different than homosexual-Americans; as to the new class they just created out of thin air June 26, 2015. That conversation of course will lead to how homosexuals and polygamists are identified only by behaviors...which will lead to ..."how do we decide which behaviors have rights and which don't"...which will lead to "is this limited just to sexuality or can other behaviors now petition?"...which will lead to "wait a minute, are we now going to have to sit on and decide every question of law regarding human behaviors"?
And I'm going to be tickled pink watching this overreaching and treacherous Court chase its own tail round and round and round..

The founding fathers knew what they were doing. And this is why they made it perfectly clear that the US Supreme Court's mere 9 members were not qualified to legislate for the 300 million who regulate human behaviors locally, at the state level. Their June 26, 2015 Ruling was new legislation added to the Constitution. Even a pinhead flunkie of poli-sci knows that means it's not worth the paper it's written on. Only Congress may Amend the Constitution. And only a pinhead flunkie of basic logical deduction wouldn't know that polygamy is already legal by the Court's June 26, 2015 Ruling based on ...*drum roll* equality...

what ball is rolling back to the Court? is there even a case pending at this time?

the Court did not legislate. it ruled on whether something was constitutional. that's what the Court does.

go read loving v Virginia and maybe a book or two on constitutional construction.

thanks.

Yes, and there is a thread devoted to it.

a thread won't teach you anything. it's dumbass (like the o/p) leading dumbass (like you).

you're welcome

 

[Pop23]

Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record

Whether "gay married" couples names are available is irrelevant.

It's "married" couples. There is no separate list for "straight married couples" verses "gay married couples". They are all just "married.

Here is a link to the Virginia Office of Vital Records which has a link to web search going back to 1912 -->> Office of Vital Records


>>>>

That really didn't answer the question.

 

[Pop23]

Curious WorldWatcher, your opinion as to any justification you might have to why gay married couples have greater access to public accomodations laws than straight couples?

There are no public accommodation laws that list "gay" as a criteria.


>>>>

Sex and sexuality. And in some cases sexual identity. I am male (a sex) I am straight (a sexuality)

A lesbian wishes to be with women the same way as a male, yet the lesbian or even, in some cases a tranny can shower in the same locker / gym shower with my wife, yet I can't?

Tell me where that is not a violation of the law.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record

Whether "gay married" couples names are available is irrelevant.

It's "married" couples. There is no separate list for "straight married couples" verses "gay married couples". They are all just "married.

Here is a link to the Virginia Office of Vital Records which has a link to web search going back to 1912 -->> Office of Vital Records


>>>>

That really didn't answer the question.

The question was "Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record"

I provided a link showing that marriages were public record in Virginia. You can check for yourself for the other 49 states and DC. Not all states may have web access, for some you may have to go to the local country clerks office.


>>>>

 

[Pop23]

Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record

Whether "gay married" couples names are available is irrelevant.

It's "married" couples. There is no separate list for "straight married couples" verses "gay married couples". They are all just "married.

Here is a link to the Virginia Office of Vital Records which has a link to web search going back to 1912 -->> Office of Vital Records


>>>>

That really didn't answer the question.

The question was "Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record"

I provided a link showing that marriages were public record in Virginia. You can check for yourself for the other 49 states and DC. Not all states may have web access, for some you may have to go to the local country clerks office.


>>>>

So tell me, what I wished a link for AFTER I STATED THAT MARRIAGE LICENSES WERE PUBLIC RECORD.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Curious WorldWatcher, your opinion as to any justification you might have to why gay married couples have greater access to public accomodations laws than straight couples?

There are no public accommodation laws that list "gay" as a criteria.


>>>>

Sex and sexuality. And in some cases sexual identity. I am male (a sex) I am straight (a sexuality)

A lesbian wishes to be with women the same way as a male, yet the lesbian or even, in some cases a tranny can shower in the same locker / gym shower with my wife, yet I can't?

Tell me where that is not a violation of the law.

It's not a violation of the law.

If you think it is, feel free to report a lesbian couple showering (showering, not having sex) at your local community gym and file a complaint.

Locker rooms are based on gender, not sexual orientation.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record

Whether "gay married" couples names are available is irrelevant.

It's "married" couples. There is no separate list for "straight married couples" verses "gay married couples". They are all just "married.

Here is a link to the Virginia Office of Vital Records which has a link to web search going back to 1912 -->> Office of Vital Records


>>>>

That really didn't answer the question.

The question was "Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record"

I provided a link showing that marriages were public record in Virginia. You can check for yourself for the other 49 states and DC. Not all states may have web access, for some you may have to go to the local country clerks office.


>>>>

So tell me, what I wished a link for AFTER I STATED THAT MARRIAGE LICENSES WERE PUBLIC RECORD.

You are not making any sense. Please clarify your request.

The post I responded to asked for a link. That is what was provided.



>>>>

 

[Pop23]

Curious WorldWatcher, your opinion as to any justification you might have to why gay married couples have greater access to public accomodations laws than straight couples?

There are no public accommodation laws that list "gay" as a criteria.


>>>>

Sex and sexuality. And in some cases sexual identity. I am male (a sex) I am straight (a sexuality)

A lesbian wishes to be with women the same way as a male, yet the lesbian or even, in some cases a tranny can shower in the same locker / gym shower with my wife, yet I can't?

Tell me where that is not a violation of the law.

It's not a violation of the law.

If you think it is, feel free to report a lesbian couple showering (showering, not having sex) at your local community gym and file a complaint.

Locker rooms are based on gender, not sexual orientation.


>>>>

So you now want to argue, that in some cases seperate but equal is good public policy? Even though you can't cite where my argument is bogus?

Sweat.

 

[Pop23]

Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record

Whether "gay married" couples names are available is irrelevant.

It's "married" couples. There is no separate list for "straight married couples" verses "gay married couples". They are all just "married.

Here is a link to the Virginia Office of Vital Records which has a link to web search going back to 1912 -->> Office of Vital Records


>>>>

That really didn't answer the question.

The question was "Links please, now that gay married couples are on public record"

I provided a link showing that marriages were public record in Virginia. You can check for yourself for the other 49 states and DC. Not all states may have web access, for some you may have to go to the local country clerks office.


>>>>

So tell me, what I wished a link for AFTER I STATED THAT MARRIAGE LICENSES WERE PUBLIC RECORD.

You are not making any sense. Please clarify your request.

The post I responded to asked for a link. That is what was provided.



>>>>

Yes, feel free to jump into a debate and supply links to what was not part of my discussion.

 

[Pop23]

Curious WorldWatcher, your opinion as to any justification you might have to why gay married couples have greater access to public accomodations laws than straight couples?

There are no public accommodation laws that list "gay" as a criteria.


>>>>

Sex and sexuality. And in some cases sexual identity. I am male (a sex) I am straight (a sexuality)

A lesbian wishes to be with women the same way as a male, yet the lesbian or even, in some cases a tranny can shower in the same locker / gym shower with my wife, yet I can't?

Tell me where that is not a violation of the law.

It's not a violation of the law.

If you think it is, feel free to report a lesbian couple showering (showering, not having sex) at your local community gym and file a complaint.

Locker rooms are based on gender, not sexual orientation.


>>>>

Please explain this seperation that exists with sexual identity, which is legal in some jurisdictions.

GREATER ACCESS