Your Stories of how Gay Marriage ruined your Marriage

[bodecea]

its because of both. Here's the trade, I'll give ya gay marriage for repeal of equal protection clauses when it comes to non-retail businesses. Deal?

Negative. It is because of the Equal Access Laws alone. But, tell you what. Show a case where someone was FORCED to go against their beliefs in their business in a state which does NOT have Equal Access Laws. Go for it.

I'd be a lot more comfortable if equal access laws were also struck down. If everyone can choose not to contract with anyone, there's no equal protection issue, and everyone would have an equal opportunity to be a jerk and be ridiculed for it.

But the equal access laws have nothing to with the OP and Marty is just trying to hijack.

I don't have a problem with that either....then businesses can discriminate to their hearts' content....and then gays don't get blamed for laws that have nothing to do with them.

 

[Nosmo King]

Should we ban the elderly from accessing a marriage license? Surely no post menopausal woman can 'provide future population' If that's the criteria, shouldn't we then oppose marrying beyond the age of 55?

Everyone should have to undergo a fertility test before they can marry to make sure they can have kids as well... surely.

So you would deny access to a marriage license to someone who cannot have children? How is that fair? Are married couples mandated to have children? What if a married couple do not want kids? Should their marriage be annulled?

 

[bodecea]

ask the baker and the photographer who are being forced to go against their beliefs to keep their businesses about that.

And "could" is not enough to deny my Constitutional rights, of which owning a firearm is a right, and gay marriage is not, no matter what a bunch of un-elected lawyers says about it.

Proof?

Equality is indeed guaranteed by the Constitution.

Under the law. It is not guaranteed in a bake shop or with a photographer. The GOVERNMENT has to treat you equally. Forcing private organisations and individuals to do it is a progressive statist invention.

THEN, move to a state that doesn't have Equal Accomodation Laws or else work to repeal them where they exist. Don't blame gays for them.

 

[bodecea]

The OP itself is a flawed concept. Harm has been done to SOME people due to gay marriage (via public accommodation laws.)

ANd?

You'll be posting proof, right?

j/k cuz you're making it up.

So the baker and the photographer were not harmed?

and I cleaned up your excessive use of lines, you gutless rep turned off dime store hack.

I love it...still blaming gays for a state's law on Public Accomodation.

 

[NLT]

So has bodey shown proof yet that anyone ever posted that gay marriage has ruined their marriage or is she just making up shit again?

 

[bodecea]

Its objection due to the process used. I have no objection to the states changing the marriage contract they recognize via legislative action. However there is no RIGHT to gay marriage in the federal constitution, just as there is no right to abortion in it. These are derived concepts created by a judicial branch that has been exceeding its mandate for the past 30 years.

There is a right to equal protection of (equal access to) the law in the Federal Constitution, including the right to access marriage law.

There is absolutely no restriction on a gay man marrying a woman, none they have equal access.

As there was absolutely no restriction on a black man marrying a black woman....and a white man marrying a white woman. Do you know what the Supreme Court did with that argument from Virginia attorneys? They laughed.............out loud.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So you would deny access to a marriage license to someone who cannot have children? How is that fair? Are married couples mandated to have children? What if a married couple do not want kids? Should their marriage be annulled?

No, I wouldn't. However those who claim marriage is only for producing children either have a very bad argument, or do think this is fair.

How fair is it that gay people can't marry?

This is exactly the point I'm making.

 

[bendog]

ANd?

You'll be posting proof, right?

j/k cuz you're making it up.

So the baker and the photographer were not harmed?

and I cleaned up your excessive use of lines, you gutless rep turned off dime store hack.

I love it...still blaming gays for a state's law on Public Accomodation.

I can only assume his logic is that but for gay marriage there'd be no equal access violation.

I don't like equal access either, but that's sort of like riding your horse ass backwards.

 

[bodecea]

its because of both. Here's the trade, I'll give ya gay marriage for repeal of equal protection clauses when it comes to non-retail businesses. Deal?

Negative. It is because of the Equal Access Laws alone. But, tell you what. Show a case where someone was FORCED to go against their beliefs in their business in a state which does NOT have Equal Access Laws. Go for it.

Fruit of the poisoned tree. Equal access laws being used this way are resulting from gay marriage being legalized. Get rid of equal protection laws and you remove alot of my argument.

So...those accomodation laws were only enacted after legal gay marriage became legal? You sure about that?

 

[Nosmo King]

Did gay marriage impact Melissa's Sweetcakes? How about Photography by Elayne? I was sued by a lesbian couple for refusing to paint a wedding portrait. Did gay marriage impact me? Did gay marriage impact Marcia Walden who lost her job for referring a lesbian couple to a more competent counselor?

The adverse impacts were not due to marriage equality but by the stubborn bigots who left all that money on the table as they rose and indignantly walked away. If you refuse service to paying customers, don't bitch that their money was tainted. Look in the mirror to find the moron who refused business.

The adverse impacts is from government forcing people to choose between their morality and their livelihood.

How is this only about business refusal? its about the butthurt couples suing the people and forcing them to accept their business or go out of it.

No, it's a few businesses conducting business under the old Jim Crow scaffolding of refusing service due to personal animus rather than legal standing. Was Woolworth's standing behind their morality when they refused to serve African Americans? And what a narrow ledge to stand on! 'Our 'morality' keeps us from performing the exact same services as we provide everyone else because we hate you and your life!' Some morality there!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Negative. It is because of the Equal Access Laws alone. But, tell you what. Show a case where someone was FORCED to go against their beliefs in their business in a state which does NOT have Equal Access Laws. Go for it.

I'd be a lot more comfortable if equal access laws were also struck down. If everyone can choose not to contract with anyone, there's no equal protection issue, and everyone would have an equal opportunity to be a jerk and be ridiculed for it.

But the equal access laws have nothing to with the OP and Marty is just trying to hijack.

The OP itself is a flawed concept. Harm has been done to SOME people due to gay marriage (via public accommodation laws.)

Your opinion, and not an important one. The 'harm' done to public access bakers and candlestick makers does not compare to the harm to those who wish to marry another consenting adult.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The simple fact is this: the social conservatives are not going to gut the Constitution so that everybody else must follow what they want.

 

[bodecea]

So has bodey shown proof yet that anyone ever posted that gay marriage has ruined their marriage or is she just making up shit again?

Articles: Why Homosexual Marriage is Wrong

Check out #8:

Homosexual marriage will devalue your marriage. A license to marry is a legal document by which government will treat same-sex marriage as if it were equal to the real thing. A license speaks for the government and will tell society that government says the marriages are equal. Any time a lesser thing is made equal to a greater, the greater is devalued. For example:
If the Smithsonian Museum displays a hunk of polished blue glass next to the Hope Diamond with a sign that says, "These are of equal value," and treats them as if they were, the Hope Diamond is devalued in the public's eye. The government says it's just expensive blue glass. The history and mystery are lost too.
If an employer uses a robot as an employee and treats the robot the same way it treats human employees, human employees are devalued. By doing so, the employer says, "A robot can do your job, you're no better." What will you and the public think of your job and you?
If the government issues a license to babysitters that grants them the same rights, protections and responsibilities as a child's parents, parenthood is devalued. The government says parents are just babysitters.
If government grants professional licenses to just anybody, every profession and qualified professional is devalued. The government says an uneducated panhandler can do brain surgery.

and:

Ten Reasons Why ?Same-Sex Marriage? Affects Your Marriage

example of what it says:

1. Same-sex marriage reduces the worth of your marriage

Redefining marriage to include people of the same sex is a legal endorsement of the fungibility of a man and woman in marriage. To set “any two persons” on a par with a man and a woman in marriage is to reduce the worth of their roles. To draw an analogy, if a government declared the price of coal to be equivalent with the price of gold, would the cost of coal go up, or would the cost of gold come down? The price of gold would come down. Traditional marriage is the gold standard of marriage. People who affirm gay/lesbian marriage as equivalent in worth to the marriage of a husband and a wife devalue the worth of your marriage.

Just for starters.

Thanks to Bootlicker for giving me the opening I was waiting for Freewill to give me...but he was too chicken to commit.

 

[bodecea]

And....reading thru this thread gives me another idea.

 

[Nosmo King]

Marriage equality was upheld in Pennsylvania this week. The VERY NEXT DAY came reports of florists, photographers, printers, bakers and caterers seeing a boom in business.

Now if there are such service providers refusing their services to same sex couples, the harm befalling them is of their own doing. Only a rock ribbed social Conservative would leave money on the table to make the point that they themselves are too narrow minded to take advantage of the wedding boom because they think the couples are icky.

And we should listen to them, take them seriously and accept their claims of faux victimhood as cause to overturn the law? Please.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

They can access it, they just can't marry people of the same sex, because, you know, it isn't equal.

What makes homosexuality unequal? Do homosexuals pay taxes? Do they serve in the military? Are they committing crimes by merely being homosexual? What criteria do you use to decide which sober, tax paying citizens are equal, worthy or eligible for the same protections under law as you? Should there be citizens who are 'unequal'?

They do not provide future population.

Neither do an infertile opposite-sex couple, yet they are allowed to marry.

However you try to configure your failed argument, it will always fail.

 

[Pop23]

So you would deny access to a marriage license to someone who cannot have children? How is that fair? Are married couples mandated to have children? What if a married couple do not want kids? Should their marriage be annulled?

No, I wouldn't. However those who claim marriage is only for producing children either have a very bad argument, or do think this is fair.

How fair is it that gay people can't marry?

This is exactly the point I'm making.

No, there are many reasons that hetro couples can't or don't want children. Those that can't should be exempt from any such law due to disability. Gays, or so they say, are not disabled. They just can't. Some fear the consequences of having children, including death. Legitimate fear of death would also qualify for an exemption. Old age would be exempt as we all know you can not discriminate due to age.

Fertility is only the burden of hetros. It is moot to same sex.

Proceed

 

[bodecea]

So you would deny access to a marriage license to someone who cannot have children? How is that fair? Are married couples mandated to have children? What if a married couple do not want kids? Should their marriage be annulled?

No, I wouldn't. However those who claim marriage is only for producing children either have a very bad argument, or do think this is fair.

How fair is it that gay people can't marry?

This is exactly the point I'm making.

No, there are many reasons that hetro couples can't or don't want children. Those that can't should be exempt from any such law due to disability. Gays, or so they say, are not disabled. They just can't. Some fear the consequences of having children, including death. Legitimate fear of death would also qualify for an exemption. Old age would be exempt as we all know you can not discriminate due to age.

Fertility is only the burden of hetros. It is moot to same sex.

Proceed

Pop....I have a thread for you:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...aws-require-proof-of-procreation-ability.html

 

[bendog]

So has bodey shown proof yet that anyone ever posted that gay marriage has ruined their marriage or is she just making up shit again?

Articles: Why Homosexual Marriage is Wrong

Check out #8:

Homosexual marriage will devalue your marriage. A license to marry is a legal document by which government will treat same-sex marriage as if it were equal to the real thing. A license speaks for the government and will tell society that government says the marriages are equal. Any time a lesser thing is made equal to a greater, the greater is devalued. For example:
If the Smithsonian Museum displays a hunk of polished blue glass next to the Hope Diamond with a sign that says, "These are of equal value," and treats them as if they were, the Hope Diamond is devalued in the public's eye. The government says it's just expensive blue glass. The history and mystery are lost too.
If an employer uses a robot as an employee and treats the robot the same way it treats human employees, human employees are devalued. By doing so, the employer says, "A robot can do your job, you're no better." What will you and the public think of your job and you?
If the government issues a license to babysitters that grants them the same rights, protections and responsibilities as a child's parents, parenthood is devalued. The government says parents are just babysitters.
If government grants professional licenses to just anybody, every profession and qualified professional is devalued. The government says an uneducated panhandler can do brain surgery.

and:

Ten Reasons Why ?Same-Sex Marriage? Affects Your Marriage

example of what it says:

1. Same-sex marriage reduces the worth of your marriage

Redefining marriage to include people of the same sex is a legal endorsement of the fungibility of a man and woman in marriage. To set “any two persons” on a par with a man and a woman in marriage is to reduce the worth of their roles. To draw an analogy, if a government declared the price of coal to be equivalent with the price of gold, would the cost of coal go up, or would the cost of gold come down? The price of gold would come down. Traditional marriage is the gold standard of marriage. People who affirm gay/lesbian marriage as equivalent in worth to the marriage of a husband and a wife devalue the worth of your marriage.

Just for starters.

Thanks to Bootlicker for giving me the opening I was waiting for Freewill to give me...but he was too chicken to commit.

That argument actually makes sense to some people. If that doesn't scare you, it should.

 

[Pop23]

What makes homosexuality unequal? Do homosexuals pay taxes? Do they serve in the military? Are they committing crimes by merely being homosexual? What criteria do you use to decide which sober, tax paying citizens are equal, worthy or eligible for the same protections under law as you? Should there be citizens who are 'unequal'?

They do not provide future population.

Neither do an infertile opposite-sex couple, yet they are allowed to marry.

However you try to configure your failed argument, it will always fail.

Demographic groups is the argument. You want to compare a full demographic group to a sub group?

Absolutely silly