Louisiana Strikes Down Gay Marriage Ban

[daws101]

reasons YOU got married, civilly married hypocrite.

I have a civil marriage just like you do. Why don't you want my civil marriage license treated exactly like your civil marriage license?

Strawman

More like valid question too uncomfortable for you too answer.

I don't have to address every random question you ask me that has nothing to do with anything I said. Sorry Steve. A tip though, if you make it sound like you are addressing something I said when you are addressing the voices in your head, I definitely won't address it. I'm not interested in speaking for your voices, you can figure that one out yourself.

It does. Why should my civil marriage license be treated differently than yours? Explain that for us.

this should be interesting

 

[Seawytch]

What I do know is that you do not want to treat gays equally under the law. That does make you a bigot.

If your fantasy life is improved by believing I'm a guy, more power to ya love.

Yet you can't name one person who has different rights being gay than if they were straight. When you can, get back to me, Steve. So did pretending to be a lesbian on the Internet turn out to be the hoot you thought it would be?

Remember the tip if you want a date, women are actually different than you, it's not just the equipment. Good luck with that.

The right to marry the non familial consenting adult of my choice. Just as Mildred Loving could not marry a black man, I cannot marry a woman of any race. That is discrimination based on gender. Mildred didn't want to marry a black man, I don't want to marry a man at all. I married another woman. Why is it that you don't want my legal, civil marriage treated exactly like yours?

This is exactly my point. You draw the same lines they do, you just adjust where you draw them. And you go to liberal dictators to make it so. There is nothing morally superior about you, you just discriminate slightly differently.

That's funny. You make the exact argument as the racist bigots did, that it's not discrimination but I'm the one drawing "the same lines"? Irony poisoning.

I'm tired of you and your asinine delusions and endless strawmen. I'm not saying I'll never post with you again, but I'm going to take a break from this trudgery.

[emoji24]Waaaaaaahhh, I can't answer her questions and have no valid response to the very real parallels in the discrimination, so I quit!!!!



When you want to know (with dripping contempt) why anyone needs "government validation", don't ask the gays on a message board...inquire closer to home, married fella.

 

[Seawytch]

reasons YOU got married, civilly married hypocrite.

I have a civil marriage just like you do. Why don't you want my civil marriage license treated exactly like your civil marriage license?

Strawman

More like valid question too uncomfortable for you too answer.

I don't have to address every random question you ask me that has nothing to do with anything I said. Sorry Steve. A tip though, if you make it sound like you are addressing something I said when you are addressing the voices in your head, I definitely won't address it. I'm not interested in speaking for your voices, you can figure that one out yourself.

It does. Why should my civil marriage license be treated differently than yours? Explain that for us.

this should be interesting

He can't now...he quit in a huff. He doesn't like having the discrimination he supports compared to discrimination he doesn't.

 

[Seawytch]

The right to marry the non familial consenting adult of my choice. Just as Mildred Loving could not marry a black man, I cannot marry a woman of any race. That is discrimination based on gender. Mildred didn't want to marry a black man, I don't want to marry a man at all. I married another woman. Why is it that you don't want my legal, civil marriage treated exactly like yours?

Ooops, you just lost. You just said government can regulate who does and doesn't have access to government marriage. That destroys your own argument which was based on that they don't.

Check and mate, the game goes to Redfish.

I never said they could not. Of course, they have to have a reason to do it. There must be a demonstrated societal harm in allowing it. Go!

They have to have a reason you agree with you mean, else you go to dictators to do it for you.

You still can't name a single person who being straight or gay changes who they can marry. That is why it's a job for the legislature, not the courts.

They have to have a reason not based on "I think gays are icky"

It changes who you want to marry. Blacks and whites were not prevented from marrying under anti miscegenation laws, they just couldn't marry across race, they could still marry. Same exact argument you're making.

What is the difference between discrimination based on race and discrimination based on gender?

Um...OK?

It's not like blacks. Being black changed who you can marry. Being gay does not. You can spin and squirm all you want, you can't change the facts. So Steve, have you looked into this that girls and boys differences is not just their sex organs at all yet? I'm curious how that goes. Be sure to update me.

Being gay changes who you can marry just as being black did then. Blacks could marry each other they just couldn't marry who they wanted to. I can marry a guy, I don't want to.

How is discrimination based on race different than discrimination based on gender?

 

[rightwinger]

How long before Texas allows gay marriage?

 

[daws101]

How long before Texas allows gay marriage?

you mean publicly?

 

[rightwinger]

How long before Texas allows gay marriage?

you mean publicly?

Only so long before Texas lives up to its "Steers and Queers" reputation

 

[rightwinger]

 

[daws101]

the worlds largest supplier of.......(place product name here)

 

[Redfish]

California is a Democrat state that voted against, but a homosexual judge declared homosexuals come first and dictated against the constitution and the people.

So a California initiative banning all firearms would be okay with you? How about a California initiative banning evangelical Christians from civil marriage? That be okay with you?

I'm guessing California has a Constitution with a Bill of Rights that pretty much copies the Federal Bill of Rights. Any initiative in California would have to be a Constitutional initiative which I'm also guessing needs an increased signature requirement. Even if such an Initiative were to get on the ballot in California, I doubt it would pass. IF it did it would still be subject to restriction by the Federal Bill of Rights which represents a wider majority opinion.

Whether you like it or not, marriage has been declared a fundamental right...which is why anti gay laws (based solely on animus for gays) are being found unconstitutional.

I dont believe it has been,...in fact I think European courts have rejected that idea. Laws prohibiting "gay-marriage"...which you term "anti-gay" are NOT solely based on animus for gays.

You're not believing it does not make it less so. In Loving v Virginia, Zablocki v Wisconsin and Turner v Safely the SCOTU declared marriage a fundamental right.

A fundamental right for a man and a woman of different races to marry. It has nothing to do with gays.

 

[Redfish]

reasons YOU got married, civilly married hypocrite.

I have a civil marriage just like you do. Why don't you want my civil marriage license treated exactly like your civil marriage license?

Strawman

More like valid question too uncomfortable for you too answer.

I don't have to address every random question you ask me that has nothing to do with anything I said. Sorry Steve. A tip though, if you make it sound like you are addressing something I said when you are addressing the voices in your head, I definitely won't address it. I'm not interested in speaking for your voices, you can figure that one out yourself.

It does. Why should my civil marriage license be treated differently than yours? Explain that for us.

Because of human biology. your entire existence is dominated by your gayness. Grow the fuck up and accept the fact that not everyone will ever agree with you and that others will not accept the government mandating how they think or what they believe.

 

[daws101]

So a California initiative banning all firearms would be okay with you? How about a California initiative banning evangelical Christians from civil marriage? That be okay with you?

I'm guessing California has a Constitution with a Bill of Rights that pretty much copies the Federal Bill of Rights. Any initiative in California would have to be a Constitutional initiative which I'm also guessing needs an increased signature requirement. Even if such an Initiative were to get on the ballot in California, I doubt it would pass. IF it did it would still be subject to restriction by the Federal Bill of Rights which represents a wider majority opinion.

Whether you like it or not, marriage has been declared a fundamental right...which is why anti gay laws (based solely on animus for gays) are being found unconstitutional.

I dont believe it has been,...in fact I think European courts have rejected that idea. Laws prohibiting "gay-marriage"...which you term "anti-gay" are NOT solely based on animus for gays.

You're not believing it does not make it less so. In Loving v Virginia, Zablocki v Wisconsin and Turner v Safely the SCOTU declared marriage a fundamental right.

A fundamental right for a man and a woman of different races to marry. It has nothing to do with gays.

bullshit.your bogus argument is based on why people get married.
if children are the only reason for doing so then it's completely unnecessary.

Same-sex and third gender marriages
Main articles: Same-sex marriage and History of same-sex unions
As noted above, several kinds of same gendered, non-sexual marriages exist in some lineage based societies; this section relates to same gendered sexual unions. However, some cultures include third gender (two-spirited or transgendered) individuals, such as the berdache of the Zuni in New Mexico; is the marriage between a berdache and a man a "same sex marriage"? We'wha, one of the most revered Zuni elders (an Ihamana, spiritual leader) served as an emissary of the Zuni to Washington, where he met President Grover Cleveland. We'wha had a husband who was generally recognized as such.[42]

While it is a relatively new practice to grant same-sex couples the same form of legal marital recognition as commonly granted to mixed-sex couples, there is some history of recorded same-sex unions around the world.[43][44] Ancient Greek same-sex relationships were like modern companionate marriages, unlike their different-sex marriages in which the spouses had few emotional ties, and the husband had freedom to engage in outside sexual liaisons. The Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) issued in 342 CE imposed severe penalties or death on same-sex relationships[45] but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.[46] Same-sex unions were celebrated in some regions of China

 

[daws101]

reasons YOU got married, civilly married hypocrite.

I have a civil marriage just like you do. Why don't you want my civil marriage license treated exactly like your civil marriage license?

Strawman

More like valid question too uncomfortable for you too answer.

I don't have to address every random question you ask me that has nothing to do with anything I said. Sorry Steve. A tip though, if you make it sound like you are addressing something I said when you are addressing the voices in your head, I definitely won't address it. I'm not interested in speaking for your voices, you can figure that one out yourself.

It does. Why should my civil marriage license be treated differently than yours? Explain that for us.

Because of human biology. your entire existence is dominated by your gayness. Grow the fuck up and accept the fact that not everyone will ever agree with you and that others will not accept the government mandating how they think or what they believe.

homosexuality is biological you have no biological argument against it.
also your whole exsitance is dominated by your bigotry.'
not everyone has to agree.

 

[Redfish]

I'm guessing California has a Constitution with a Bill of Rights that pretty much copies the Federal Bill of Rights. Any initiative in California would have to be a Constitutional initiative which I'm also guessing needs an increased signature requirement. Even if such an Initiative were to get on the ballot in California, I doubt it would pass. IF it did it would still be subject to restriction by the Federal Bill of Rights which represents a wider majority opinion.

Whether you like it or not, marriage has been declared a fundamental right...which is why anti gay laws (based solely on animus for gays) are being found unconstitutional.

I dont believe it has been,...in fact I think European courts have rejected that idea. Laws prohibiting "gay-marriage"...which you term "anti-gay" are NOT solely based on animus for gays.

You're not believing it does not make it less so. In Loving v Virginia, Zablocki v Wisconsin and Turner v Safely the SCOTU declared marriage a fundamental right.

A fundamental right for a man and a woman of different races to marry. It has nothing to do with gays.

bullshit.you bogus argument is based on why people get married.
if children are the only reason for doing so then it's completely unnecessary.

Same-sex and third gender marriages
Main articles: Same-sex marriage and History of same-sex unions
As noted above, several kinds of same gendered, non-sexual marriages exist in some lineage based societies; this section relates to same gendered sexual unions. However, some cultures include third gender (two-spirited or transgendered) individuals, such as the berdache of the Zuni in New Mexico; is the marriage between a berdache and a man a "same sex marriage"? We'wha, one of the most revered Zuni elders (an Ihamana, spiritual leader) served as an emissary of the Zuni to Washington, where he met President Grover Cleveland. We'wha had a husband who was generally recognized as such.[42]

While it is a relatively new practice to grant same-sex couples the same form of legal marital recognition as commonly granted to mixed-sex couples, there is some history of recorded same-sex unions around the world.[43][44] Ancient Greek same-sex relationships were like modern companionate marriages, unlike their different-sex marriages in which the spouses had few emotional ties, and the husband had freedom to engage in outside sexual liaisons. The Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) issued in 342 CE imposed severe penalties or death on same-sex relationships[45] but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.[46] Same-sex unions were celebrated in some regions of China

yes, same sex marriage was practiced in ancient Greece, Rome, and Egypt. Did you notice that those civilizations collapsed shortly after that practice began?

Study a little history, dude. you might learn something.

But, thats not what I was addressing. Wytch keeps claiming that Loving established the basis for gay marriage-----------that is a lie. Loving established that different races should be able to marry---not two people of the same sex..

 

[Redfish]

Strawman

More like valid question too uncomfortable for you too answer.

I don't have to address every random question you ask me that has nothing to do with anything I said. Sorry Steve. A tip though, if you make it sound like you are addressing something I said when you are addressing the voices in your head, I definitely won't address it. I'm not interested in speaking for your voices, you can figure that one out yourself.

It does. Why should my civil marriage license be treated differently than yours? Explain that for us.

Because of human biology. your entire existence is dominated by your gayness. Grow the fuck up and accept the fact that not everyone will ever agree with you and that others will not accept the government mandating how they think or what they believe.

homosexuality is biological you have no biological argument against it.
also your whole exsitance is dominated by your bigotry.'
not everyone has to agree.

Bullshit. The human rectum was not designed to be repeatedly penetrated by a penis. the human vagina was designed for that purpose. It is biological. homosexuality is an aberation of the human condition.

 

[daws101]

Whether you like it or not, marriage has been declared a fundamental right...which is why anti gay laws (based solely on animus for gays) are being found unconstitutional.

I dont believe it has been,...in fact I think European courts have rejected that idea. Laws prohibiting "gay-marriage"...which you term "anti-gay" are NOT solely based on animus for gays.

You're not believing it does not make it less so. In Loving v Virginia, Zablocki v Wisconsin and Turner v Safely the SCOTU declared marriage a fundamental right.

A fundamental right for a man and a woman of different races to marry. It has nothing to do with gays.

bullshit.you bogus argument is based on why people get married.
if children are the only reason for doing so then it's completely unnecessary.

Same-sex and third gender marriages
Main articles: Same-sex marriage and History of same-sex unions
As noted above, several kinds of same gendered, non-sexual marriages exist in some lineage based societies; this section relates to same gendered sexual unions. However, some cultures include third gender (two-spirited or transgendered) individuals, such as the berdache of the Zuni in New Mexico; is the marriage between a berdache and a man a "same sex marriage"? We'wha, one of the most revered Zuni elders (an Ihamana, spiritual leader) served as an emissary of the Zuni to Washington, where he met President Grover Cleveland. We'wha had a husband who was generally recognized as such.[42]

While it is a relatively new practice to grant same-sex couples the same form of legal marital recognition as commonly granted to mixed-sex couples, there is some history of recorded same-sex unions around the world.[43][44] Ancient Greek same-sex relationships were like modern companionate marriages, unlike their different-sex marriages in which the spouses had few emotional ties, and the husband had freedom to engage in outside sexual liaisons. The Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) issued in 342 CE imposed severe penalties or death on same-sex relationships[45] but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.[46] Same-sex unions were celebrated in some regions of China

yes, same sex marriage was practiced in ancient Greece, Rome, and Egypt. Did you notice that those civilizations collapsed shortly after that practice began?

Study a little history, dude. you might learn something.

But, thats not what I was addressing. Wytch keeps claiming that Loving established the basis for gay marriage-----------that is a lie. Loving established that different races should be able to marry---not two people of the same sex..

your first statement is absolute bullshit.. there is no causal historical evidence corroborating that myth.
Loving did establish the basis for same sex marriage.
you might want to study some objective history..

 

[daws101]

More like valid question too uncomfortable for you too answer.

I don't have to address every random question you ask me that has nothing to do with anything I said. Sorry Steve. A tip though, if you make it sound like you are addressing something I said when you are addressing the voices in your head, I definitely won't address it. I'm not interested in speaking for your voices, you can figure that one out yourself.

It does. Why should my civil marriage license be treated differently than yours? Explain that for us.

Because of human biology. your entire existence is dominated by your gayness. Grow the fuck up and accept the fact that not everyone will ever agree with you and that others will not accept the government mandating how they think or what they believe.

homosexuality is biological you have no biological argument against it.
also your whole exsitance is dominated by your bigotry.'
not everyone has to agree.

Bullshit. The human rectum was not designed to be repeatedly penetrated by a penis. the human vagina was designed for that purpose. It is biological. homosexuality is an aberation of the human condition.

the term guys will fuck anything refutes that claim..

 

[Redfish]

the judges once again ruled against the will of the people.

"February poll of 635 Louisiana residents found that only 28 percent of those surveyed felt gay marriage should be legal (though 54 percent thought civil unions should be allowed for gay couples)."

it happened in california and now in louisiana.

when will we stop activist judges from making law from the bench?

 

[Redfish]

I dont believe it has been,...in fact I think European courts have rejected that idea. Laws prohibiting "gay-marriage"...which you term "anti-gay" are NOT solely based on animus for gays.

You're not believing it does not make it less so. In Loving v Virginia, Zablocki v Wisconsin and Turner v Safely the SCOTU declared marriage a fundamental right.

A fundamental right for a man and a woman of different races to marry. It has nothing to do with gays.

bullshit.you bogus argument is based on why people get married.
if children are the only reason for doing so then it's completely unnecessary.

Same-sex and third gender marriages
Main articles: Same-sex marriage and History of same-sex unions
As noted above, several kinds of same gendered, non-sexual marriages exist in some lineage based societies; this section relates to same gendered sexual unions. However, some cultures include third gender (two-spirited or transgendered) individuals, such as the berdache of the Zuni in New Mexico; is the marriage between a berdache and a man a "same sex marriage"? We'wha, one of the most revered Zuni elders (an Ihamana, spiritual leader) served as an emissary of the Zuni to Washington, where he met President Grover Cleveland. We'wha had a husband who was generally recognized as such.[42]

While it is a relatively new practice to grant same-sex couples the same form of legal marital recognition as commonly granted to mixed-sex couples, there is some history of recorded same-sex unions around the world.[43][44] Ancient Greek same-sex relationships were like modern companionate marriages, unlike their different-sex marriages in which the spouses had few emotional ties, and the husband had freedom to engage in outside sexual liaisons. The Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) issued in 342 CE imposed severe penalties or death on same-sex relationships[45] but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.[46] Same-sex unions were celebrated in some regions of China

yes, same sex marriage was practiced in ancient Greece, Rome, and Egypt. Did you notice that those civilizations collapsed shortly after that practice began?

Study a little history, dude. you might learn something.

But, thats not what I was addressing. Wytch keeps claiming that Loving established the basis for gay marriage-----------that is a lie. Loving established that different races should be able to marry---not two people of the same sex..

your first statement is absolute bullshit.. there is no causal historical evidence corroborating that myth.
Loving did establish the basis for same sex marriage.
you might want to study some objective history..

Those civilizations fell when they lost their moral compass and established a rule of "anything goes" That is historical fact.

Loving was about interracial marriage, nothing more.

 

[Redfish]

I don't have to address every random question you ask me that has nothing to do with anything I said. Sorry Steve. A tip though, if you make it sound like you are addressing something I said when you are addressing the voices in your head, I definitely won't address it. I'm not interested in speaking for your voices, you can figure that one out yourself.

It does. Why should my civil marriage license be treated differently than yours? Explain that for us.

Because of human biology. your entire existence is dominated by your gayness. Grow the fuck up and accept the fact that not everyone will ever agree with you and that others will not accept the government mandating how they think or what they believe.

homosexuality is biological you have no biological argument against it.
also your whole exsitance is dominated by your bigotry.'
not everyone has to agree.

Bullshit. The human rectum was not designed to be repeatedly penetrated by a penis. the human vagina was designed for that purpose. It is biological. homosexuality is an aberation of the human condition.

the term guys will fuck anything refutes that claim..

nice try. but gay guys have no interest in vaginas. and straight guys have no interest in another man's asshole.