Should people have to perform/provide services for gay weddings?

[Seawytch]

That's a lot of adoptions, artificial inseminations and surrogacies you want to stop...by straight couples.

I didn't say to stop adoption. I simply believe that only children that are biological to a husband and wife should be deductible. Marriage is only between a man and woman for the purpose of becoming one flesh.

Then you were just medically incorrect. A surrogate mother has no biological connection of the child she carries. It is the biological child of the parents who engaged the surrogate services. In some cases the surrogate mother is the biological mother, but in most cases the embryo is implanted once conceived in a laboratory.

That is correct. I was a gestational surrogate twice. I have no biological connection to those three children. A traditional surrogate uses her own egg. Not to mention, many heterosexual couples use artificial insemination using sperm not the husbands.

 

[OODA_Loop]

They did not rule as to the constitutionality of anti gay marriage laws.

Yes, states can create laws. If the law violates the Constitution, it will be struck down by the SCOTUS (in theory). Whether anti gay marriage laws do that has not been challenged yet.

The ruled on another case based on the sovereignty of the state in marriage.

Thus the 10th says the Constitution has no effect on the matter.

State right.

{sigh}

The Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for same-sex couples to marry in California, but avoided directly answering constitutional questions about state marriage laws.

SCOTUS Punts on Gay Marriage

The Court opts for an incremental approach but a major victory nonetheless

Okay already?

Opinion pieces ?

Got anything from the decision ?

 

[OODA_Loop]

The whole premise of the defeat of DOMA was based on states rights.

Come on.

 

[Seawytch]

The ruled on another case based on the sovereignty of the state in marriage.

Thus the 10th says the Constitution has no effect on the matter.

State right.

{sigh}

The Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for same-sex couples to marry in California, but avoided directly answering constitutional questions about state marriage laws.

SCOTUS Punts on Gay Marriage

The Court opts for an incremental approach but a major victory nonetheless

Okay already?

Opinion pieces ?

Got anything from the decision ?

I'll wait until the first challenge, then you'll get it.

 

[The Rabbi]

No, your religion dictates that. In 13 states marriage is legally between same sex couples as well. Those states chose marriage equality and the only ruling the SCOTUS made was on the Federal recognition of those legal marriages.

It has nothing to do with religion.

Many states forbid gay marriage. Do you support the right of those states to continue not to recognize gay marriage, as you support the right of those states that did vote to recognize it?

No because those laws violate the US Constitution as does the rest of DOMA still in place.

Oh well so much for principle. It's "screw them, I want mine!"

 

[Seawytch]

Your map needs updating. We can marry in CA again (already did in 2008 myself) the most populous state in the union.

 

[Seawytch]

It has nothing to do with religion.

Many states forbid gay marriage. Do you support the right of those states to continue not to recognize gay marriage, as you support the right of those states that did vote to recognize it?

No because those laws violate the US Constitution as does the rest of DOMA still in place.

Oh well so much for principle. It's "screw them, I want mine!"

Yes, when "mine" are equal rights and equal protections, you bet!

 

[The Rabbi]

Why is it the map of gay marriage seems to mirror the Dem-GOP divide?
Hmm.

 

[The Rabbi]

No because those laws violate the US Constitution as does the rest of DOMA still in place.

Oh well so much for principle. It's "screw them, I want mine!"

Yes, when "mine" are equal rights and equal protects, you bet!

No, you want special rights. You already had equal rights. And you also want the rest of us to pay for it.
Free loading rent seeker.

 

[Katzndogz]

What would solve everything is to make a complete division. If someone has an objection to providing services to same sex couples they are permitted to refuse services. If someone has an objection to providing those same services to heterosexual couples they are permitted to do so.

 

[OODA_Loop]

{sigh}

The Supreme Court on Wednesday cleared the way for same-sex couples to marry in California, but avoided directly answering constitutional questions about state marriage laws.

SCOTUS Punts on Gay Marriage

The Court opts for an incremental approach but a major victory nonetheless

Okay already?

Opinion pieces ?

Got anything from the decision ?

I'll wait until the first challenge, then you'll get it.

United States v. Windsor is settled upon the sovereignty of state.

They are going to unsettle it ?

They already refused to rule on other cases based on the affirmation of Windsor

 

[The Rabbi]

What would solve everything is to make a complete division. If someone has an objection to providing services to same sex couples they are permitted to refuse services. If someone has an objection to providing those same services to heterosexual couples they are permitted to do so.

That would be discriminatory and would invite absurd comparisons to blacks in the civil rights movement. The homo lobby has already demonstrated the power of co opting the civil rights movement to its own agenda. Never mind they have nothing to do with each other and many black leaders are appalled and oppoosed to gay marriage themselves.
No, the homo lobby has a definite agenda. Gay marriage is just one station on the road.

 

[Seawytch]

What would solve everything is to make a complete division. If someone has an objection to providing services to same sex couples they are permitted to refuse services. If someone has an objection to providing those same services to heterosexual couples they are permitted to do so.

Or blacks or Baptists or Jews or cripples or fat people or left handed people..

Civil Rights Act, Americans with Disabilities Act and a shitload of Public Accommodation laws...get to repealing.

 

[OODA_Loop]

What would solve everything is to make a complete division. If someone has an objection to providing services to same sex couples they are permitted to refuse services. If someone has an objection to providing those same services to heterosexual couples they are permitted to do so.

Or blacks or Baptists or Jews or cripples or fat people or left handed people..

Civil Rights Act, Americans with Disabilities Act and a shitload of Public Accommodation laws...get to repealing.

Gay is not a protected class.

 

[bodecea]

What would solve everything is to make a complete division. If someone has an objection to providing services to same sex couples they are permitted to refuse services. If someone has an objection to providing those same services to heterosexual couples they are permitted to do so.

That would be discriminatory and would invite absurd comparisons to blacks in the civil rights movement. The homo lobby has already demonstrated the power of co opting the civil rights movement to its own agenda. Never mind they have nothing to do with each other and many black leaders are appalled and oppoosed to gay marriage themselves.
No, the homo lobby has a definite agenda. Gay marriage is just one station on the road.

There have been several civil rights movements. It's never been just blacks gaining civil rights, you know. Civil rights is not just an issue of race.

 

[Seawytch]

What would solve everything is to make a complete division. If someone has an objection to providing services to same sex couples they are permitted to refuse services. If someone has an objection to providing those same services to heterosexual couples they are permitted to do so.

Or blacks or Baptists or Jews or cripples or fat people or left handed people..

Civil Rights Act, Americans with Disabilities Act and a shitload of Public Accommodation laws...get to repealing.

Gay is not a protected class.

Uh, yes in some states it is covered by both PA and non discrimination laws.

Just for you from Scalia...


“As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘ “bare . . . desire to harm” ’couples in same-sex marriages. … How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.”


In other words, it ain't over yet.

 

[The Rabbi]

Or blacks or Baptists or Jews or cripples or fat people or left handed people..

Civil Rights Act, Americans with Disabilities Act and a shitload of Public Accommodation laws...get to repealing.

Gay is not a protected class.

Uh, yes in some states it is covered by both PA and non discrimination laws.

Just for you from Scalia...


“As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘ “bare . . . desire to harm” ’couples in same-sex marriages. … How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.”


In other words, it ain't over yet.

Scalia is easily the smartest man on the court. He understands that all of this has nothing to do with civil rights, equality or anything else. It is all about instituting the gay agenda.

 

[bodecea]

Gay is not a protected class.

Uh, yes in some states it is covered by both PA and non discrimination laws.

Just for you from Scalia...


“As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by ‘ “bare . . . desire to harm” ’couples in same-sex marriages. … How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.”


In other words, it ain't over yet.

Scalia is easily the smartest man on the court. He understands that all of this has nothing to do with civil rights, equality or anything else. It is all about instituting the gay agenda.

 

[Katzndogz]

What would solve everything is to make a complete division. If someone has an objection to providing services to same sex couples they are permitted to refuse services. If someone has an objection to providing those same services to heterosexual couples they are permitted to do so.

That would be discriminatory and would invite absurd comparisons to blacks in the civil rights movement. The homo lobby has already demonstrated the power of co opting the civil rights movement to its own agenda. Never mind they have nothing to do with each other and many black leaders are appalled and oppoosed to gay marriage themselves.
No, the homo lobby has a definite agenda. Gay marriage is just one station on the road.

That's true. Which is why the fight against that agenda must be step up.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Uh, yes in some states it is covered by both PA and non discrimination laws.

In some what ?