Jimmy Carter: "Leave Gay Marriage To States To Decide" (Right On Jimmy!)

[martybegan]

Again, try bringing your CA weapon permit and CA weapon to NYC and see how that goes.

Again, my CA weapons permit is treated no differently than an Alabama weapons permit in NY.

Why would you want my marriage license treated differently than the guy who married his 15 year old first cousin in Alabama?

Your inability to admit to the point I made confirms your inability to reason.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about YOU. A weapons permit is not treated differently state to state. My weapons permit from CA is not treated differently in Alabama than someone who got one in Texas is it? Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours? I don't want your weapons permit (that you lied about having) treated differently than mine. Why can't you answer that simple question?

I made one typo about a owning a gun, I did not lie. I have repeatedly stated in multiple threads that I do not own a firearm, but I protect vehemently my right to own one.

And its not what I want, its what the State Legislatures want. What i want is moot because I live in NY and have no issue with CCM being made legal via legislative action.

Your 3 state salsa dance ignores the basic premise of what you want for your marriage license and what you don't care about with your CCW. If owning and possessing a gun is a right, a CCW should cross state lines like a Drivers license, and what YOU want a marriage license to be.

If your SSM is a right, and a right is a right, a CCW permit should transfer just as easily as a driver's license and a marriage license.

You're dodging the question. I don't want a CCW permit treated differently. I want them to be treated the same and they are. Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours?

So a person can walk around NYC with a California CCW?

 

[Seawytch]

Again, my CA weapons permit is treated no differently than an Alabama weapons permit in NY.

Why would you want my marriage license treated differently than the guy who married his 15 year old first cousin in Alabama?

Your inability to admit to the point I made confirms your inability to reason.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about YOU. A weapons permit is not treated differently state to state. My weapons permit from CA is not treated differently in Alabama than someone who got one in Texas is it? Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours? I don't want your weapons permit (that you lied about having) treated differently than mine. Why can't you answer that simple question?

I made one typo about a owning a gun, I did not lie. I have repeatedly stated in multiple threads that I do not own a firearm, but I protect vehemently my right to own one.

And its not what I want, its what the State Legislatures want. What i want is moot because I live in NY and have no issue with CCM being made legal via legislative action.

Your 3 state salsa dance ignores the basic premise of what you want for your marriage license and what you don't care about with your CCW. If owning and possessing a gun is a right, a CCW should cross state lines like a Drivers license, and what YOU want a marriage license to be.

If your SSM is a right, and a right is a right, a CCW permit should transfer just as easily as a driver's license and a marriage license.

You're dodging the question. I don't want a CCW permit treated differently. I want them to be treated the same and they are. Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours?

So a person can walk around NYC with a California CCW?

Ah, so now you're being intentionally obtuse to avoid answering a simple question. Gosh, what could your reason be for wanting my marriage license treated differently than yours...I wonder....

 

[martybegan]

Your inability to admit to the point I made confirms your inability to reason.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about YOU. A weapons permit is not treated differently state to state. My weapons permit from CA is not treated differently in Alabama than someone who got one in Texas is it? Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours? I don't want your weapons permit (that you lied about having) treated differently than mine. Why can't you answer that simple question?

I made one typo about a owning a gun, I did not lie. I have repeatedly stated in multiple threads that I do not own a firearm, but I protect vehemently my right to own one.

And its not what I want, its what the State Legislatures want. What i want is moot because I live in NY and have no issue with CCM being made legal via legislative action.

Your 3 state salsa dance ignores the basic premise of what you want for your marriage license and what you don't care about with your CCW. If owning and possessing a gun is a right, a CCW should cross state lines like a Drivers license, and what YOU want a marriage license to be.

If your SSM is a right, and a right is a right, a CCW permit should transfer just as easily as a driver's license and a marriage license.

You're dodging the question. I don't want a CCW permit treated differently. I want them to be treated the same and they are. Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours?

So a person can walk around NYC with a California CCW?

Ah, so now you're being intentionally obtuse to avoid answering a simple question. Gosh, what could your reason be for wanting my marriage license treated differently than yours...I wonder....

YOU are the one not answering the question, because you know the answer and it doesn't fit your agenda.

My agenda is to correct what the courts have been doing the past few decades, which is legislating, not adjudicating. My position on this is as clear as day.

 

[TooTall]

Jimmy Carter is wrong and the big government RWs are wrong.

Government does not belong in our private lives any more than religion does.

States are the entity that issue marriage license, so they are involved in our private life. Religion is offered free to everyone. Those that refuse to accept it will regret doing so.
A lot of states have found that even when they have a referendum that puts marriage is between a man and a woman in the state constitution, a federal judge over rules the will of the people. That really sux, but it is the system and must be accepted. Of course their are provisions to change the system, and change is being attempted by a few good men and women.
I am not a fan of Jimmy Carter, but he is being criticized by the leftist bigots and gays for holding to his Christian beliefs. Good for Jimmy!
Do I hear an AMEN!

 

[Roadrunner]

He's right. At least he is using common sense of how gay marriage should be delt with..........by the will of the voter and not by an activist rogue judge.


Jimmy Carter Leave gay marriage to states to decide - Washington Times

States rights do not exist in the eyes of the present administration or the Democrat party in general.

 

[Roadrunner]

Jimmy Carter is wrong and the big government RWs are wrong.

Government does not belong in our private lives any more than religion does.

States are the entity that issue marriage license, so they are involved in our private life. Religion is offered free to everyone. Those that refuse to accept it will regret doing so.
A lot of states have found that even when they have a referendum that puts marriage is between a man and a woman in the state constitution, a federal judge over rules the will of the people. That really sux, but it is the system and must be accepted. Of course their are provisions to change the system, and change is being attempted by a few good men and women.
I am not a fan of Jimmy Carter, but he is being criticized by the leftist bigots and gays for holding to his Christian beliefs. Good for Jimmy!
Do I hear an AMEN!

We can solve this easily.

Civil union contracts for any number of consenting adults.

Marriage by religious institutions for straight couples.

 

[jillian]

actually, you don't care about history.

that's the point. but wingers never do.

You are a left winger that thinks your words will eventually overcome reality. It ain't happening.

as with everything else in rightwingnuthackworld, you have it butt backwards.

if this president engaged in iran/contra, you'd be asking for his gonads on a spike

if this president raised taxes eight times, you'd be shrieking for impeachment

pathetic that you don't understand how arming bin laden, as Reagan did, affects us today.

this is why you don't understand history and why you think Reagan was anything but a horrible and divisive president whose actions) still haunt us.

 

[Roadrunner]

We are well past the point where Gay Marriage can be decided on a state by state basis

We got past the point where the states had any rights when the 14th Amendment was passed at bayonet point.

 

[Roadrunner]

Carter would have a point if the government was actually forcing churches to marry any couple against their wishes, gay or otherwise. If only this was actually happening any where in our nation...if only.

Since when is freedom of religion limited only to a Church?

Because gays are getting married people are having their freedom of religion limited? Not sure how that works.

When you force someone to either officiate at a gay wedding or go out of business, you are limiting freedom of religion.

Nobody should be forced to officiate any wedding against their wishes.

Or bake a cake, or sew a dress for a man................................~!

 

[jillian]

He's right. At least he is using common sense of how gay marriage should be delt with..........by the will of the voter and not by an activist rogue judge.


Jimmy Carter Leave gay marriage to states to decide - Washington Times

States rights do not exist in the eyes of the present administration or the Democrat party in general.

what states' rights?

states have power.

they do not have rights. and they certainly can't abridge rights guaranteed by the federal constitution and the caselaw construing it.... you know, like equal protection.

now be a good boy and look up the supremacy clause.

 

[Roadrunner]

I'd be perfectly fine with Jimmy's idea if my marriage was recognized in all 50 states just like 1st cousin marriages are. Not all states will marry 1st cousins but all 50 have to recognize them.

Nobody cares if you marry your gay cousin. Having children with them, if possible, might be a bit more complex, but eugenics aside, no one gives a shit.

Apparently I didn't type slow enough for you to understand what I said. Read it again and sound out the words. We can't see your lips moving.

No one cares. I never cared about gay marriage and can't bring myself to care about it now.

Really, it's just an Alinsky issue to divide.

I really don't give a damn what gays do, as long as they don't "do it in the road".

 

[jillian]

We are well past the point where Gay Marriage can be decided on a state by state basis

We got past the point where the states had any rights when the 14th Amendment was passed at bayonet point.

^^^^^^

neo-confederate insurrectionist. *shakes head*

it would probably be a good idea for you to actually read and understand caselaw.

and it would also probably be a good idea for you to understand that, no, you cannot own other human beings; no you cannot keep blacks, jews and gays out of your bigoted life.

and it would probably be good if you acknowledged that if this president wasn't black, you all wouldn't be ranting and raving the way you have for the past six years

 

[Roadrunner]

The idea that an individual rights issue can be decided on a state by state basis has been obsolete since the Civil War

The question is that is this shit a right. Do you have a right to force another private person to do something they don't want to.

Forcing GOVERNMENT to be neutral and accommodating to all is acceptable, forcing individuals to comply is basically Jim crow in photo negative.

You have a right to equal treatment under the law

Once gay couples cross state lines, they cannot move from married, to unmarried and back to married status

It is unworkable and will be corrected by the courts

same as with a pistol permit then, equal protection and all.

Funny how selectively they apply parts of the Constitution.

 

[jillian]

I'd be perfectly fine with Jimmy's idea if my marriage was recognized in all 50 states just like 1st cousin marriages are. Not all states will marry 1st cousins but all 50 have to recognize them.

Nobody cares if you marry your gay cousin. Having children with them, if possible, might be a bit more complex, but eugenics aside, no one gives a shit.

Apparently I didn't type slow enough for you to understand what I said. Read it again and sound out the words. We can't see your lips moving.

No one cares. I never cared about gay marriage and can't bring myself to care about it now.

and ultimately, you shouldn't care about it except to the extent that you understand that it's important to provide equal protection to our citizens.

the rest shouldn't be any concern to anyone.

 

[Roadrunner]

same as with a pistol permit then, equal protection and all.

Irrelevant to the discussion. My CA weapons permit is treated exactly like all weapons permits. My CA drivers license is treated exactly like all drivers licesnses are treated. Why do you want my marriage license treated differently?

Again, try bringing your CA weapon permit and CA weapon to NYC and see how that goes.

Again, my CA weapons permit is treated no differently than an Alabama weapons permit in NY.

Why would you want my marriage license treated differently than the guy who married his 15 year old first cousin in Alabama?

Your inability to admit to the point I made confirms your inability to reason.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about YOU. A weapons permit is not treated differently state to state. My weapons permit from CA is not treated differently in Alabama than someone who got one in Texas is it? Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours? I don't want your weapons permit (that you lied about having) treated differently than mine. Why can't you answer that simple question?

Your right to carry is denied in New York.

Am I right.

 

[Roadrunner]

Again, my CA weapons permit is treated no differently than an Alabama weapons permit in NY.

Why would you want my marriage license treated differently than the guy who married his 15 year old first cousin in Alabama?

Your inability to admit to the point I made confirms your inability to reason.

Funny, I was thinking the same thing about YOU. A weapons permit is not treated differently state to state. My weapons permit from CA is not treated differently in Alabama than someone who got one in Texas is it? Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours? I don't want your weapons permit (that you lied about having) treated differently than mine. Why can't you answer that simple question?

I made one typo about a owning a gun, I did not lie. I have repeatedly stated in multiple threads that I do not own a firearm, but I protect vehemently my right to own one.

And its not what I want, its what the State Legislatures want. What i want is moot because I live in NY and have no issue with CCM being made legal via legislative action.

Your 3 state salsa dance ignores the basic premise of what you want for your marriage license and what you don't care about with your CCW. If owning and possessing a gun is a right, a CCW should cross state lines like a Drivers license, and what YOU want a marriage license to be.

If your SSM is a right, and a right is a right, a CCW permit should transfer just as easily as a driver's license and a marriage license.

You're dodging the question. I don't want a CCW permit treated differently. I want them to be treated the same and they are. Why do you want my marriage license treated differently than yours?

So a person can walk around NYC with a California CCW?

I think the point being made is that out of state permits are equally invalid across the board in NYC.

Not treated differently, all are denied.

I could be wrong.

 

[Valerie]

I'd be perfectly fine with Jimmy's idea if my marriage was recognized in all 50 states just like 1st cousin marriages are. Not all states will marry 1st cousins but all 50 have to recognize them.

Nobody cares if you marry your gay cousin. Having children with them, if possible, might be a bit more complex, but eugenics aside, no one gives a shit.

Apparently I didn't type slow enough for you to understand what I said. Read it again and sound out the words. We can't see your lips moving.

No one cares. I never cared about gay marriage and can't bring myself to care about it now.

and ultimately, you shouldn't care about it except to the extent that you understand that it's important to provide equal protection to our citizens.

the rest shouldn't be any concern to anyone.

exactly... since when do rethuglicans care what jimmy carter thinks...?

 

[mdk]

Jimmy Carter is wrong and the big government RWs are wrong.

Government does not belong in our private lives any more than religion does.

States are the entity that issue marriage license, so they are involved in our private life. Religion is offered free to everyone. Those that refuse to accept it will regret doing so.
A lot of states have found that even when they have a referendum that puts marriage is between a man and a woman in the state constitution, a federal judge over rules the will of the people. That really sux, but it is the system and must be accepted. Of course their are provisions to change the system, and change is being attempted by a few good men and women.
I am not a fan of Jimmy Carter, but he is being criticized by the leftist bigots and gays for holding to his Christian beliefs. Good for Jimmy!
Do I hear an AMEN!

We can solve this easily.

Civil union contracts for any number of consenting adults.

Marriage by religious institutions for straight couples.

That is what was almost going to happen until socially conservative states decided even civil unions was too much and banned those as well. Those states forced gay groups to pursue marriage outright. Besides, religious institutions don't own marriage anymore than the state does.

 

[Roadrunner]

Jimmy Carter is wrong and the big government RWs are wrong.

Government does not belong in our private lives any more than religion does.

States are the entity that issue marriage license, so they are involved in our private life. Religion is offered free to everyone. Those that refuse to accept it will regret doing so.
A lot of states have found that even when they have a referendum that puts marriage is between a man and a woman in the state constitution, a federal judge over rules the will of the people. That really sux, but it is the system and must be accepted. Of course their are provisions to change the system, and change is being attempted by a few good men and women.
I am not a fan of Jimmy Carter, but he is being criticized by the leftist bigots and gays for holding to his Christian beliefs. Good for Jimmy!
Do I hear an AMEN!

We can solve this easily.

Civil union contracts for any number of consenting adults.

Marriage by religious institutions for straight couples.

That is what was almost going to happen until socially conservative states decided even civil unions was too much and banned those as well. Those states forced gay groups to pursue marriage outright. Besides, religious institutions don't own marriage anymore than the state does.

Well, I am not gay and I am not getting married.

I don't personally know any gay people who have felt the need to inform me of the fact.

So, I really go no skin in this game, but, it is raining and I am housebound for the moment.

Otherwise, I don't really give a damn how people hook up.

 

[mdk]

Jimmy Carter is wrong and the big government RWs are wrong.

Government does not belong in our private lives any more than religion does.

States are the entity that issue marriage license, so they are involved in our private life. Religion is offered free to everyone. Those that refuse to accept it will regret doing so.
A lot of states have found that even when they have a referendum that puts marriage is between a man and a woman in the state constitution, a federal judge over rules the will of the people. That really sux, but it is the system and must be accepted. Of course their are provisions to change the system, and change is being attempted by a few good men and women.
I am not a fan of Jimmy Carter, but he is being criticized by the leftist bigots and gays for holding to his Christian beliefs. Good for Jimmy!
Do I hear an AMEN!

We can solve this easily.

Civil union contracts for any number of consenting adults.

Marriage by religious institutions for straight couples.

That is what was almost going to happen until socially conservative states decided even civil unions was too much and banned those as well. Those states forced gay groups to pursue marriage outright. Besides, religious institutions don't own marriage anymore than the state does.

Well, I am not gay and I am not getting married.

I don't personally know any gay people who have felt the need to inform me of the fact.

So, I really go no skin in this game, but, it is raining and I am housebound for the moment.

Otherwise, I don't really give a damn how people hook up.

Fair enough.