User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 94

  1. #71
    Guerilla Urbanist Brendan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cogdecree View Post
    The constitution is famous for how vague it is, there isn't a dividing line.
    Exactly.
    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    You should just ask for civil unions to be equal in rights to marriages. Any civil right granted by marriage to be granted to civil unions. I don't see why the definition of marriage has to be changed, just because you want other people to accept you.
    What if we want a union that we believe is recognized and protected by a power higher than that of earthly government?
    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    Which is exactly why I can't be happy about this development, even though I support the goal of gay-marriage advocates; if a state Supreme Court is able to appropriate this much power for themselves on this particular issue, how is their power limited on any other issue? Instead of a balance-of-powers, we have judicial despotism. The result is that the one group has increased personal liberty and autonamy in one (albeit important) area, while everyone (including gays) has substantially endangered personal liberty and autonamy in all other areas. When the means to achieve an end contribute to the long-term degredation of such an end (that end, in essense, being the maximization of individual liberty and autonamy), then it is inherently a bad thing. And yes, I know this decision was justified on the basis of equal rights, but to give the Judiciary the power to make this broad of an interpretation of equal rights is to effectively give them the power of arbitrary judgement concerning all gray areas, which amounts to virtually unlimited power, in much the same way that the Federal government has effectively unlimited power over state governments due to an overly-broad interpretation of the commerce clause that makes the tenth amendment worthless.
    Well, yeah, but that's kind of their job. It's not as though they have the power to decree this law is now in place and that one is overturned without precedent. They decide on a case to case basis. And for that matter, they don't even have the luxury of proposing or ratifying law, only overturning law which violates the constitution.

    If the Supreme Court held a press conference tomorrow in which they said, "Yeah, no one brought a case before us, but we hereby declare Obama's election unconstitutional..." Well I can't say I'd be surprised if people just went with it, since my esteem for the masses isn't stellar, but such is outside their ennumerated powers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffster View Post
    You're not serious are you? Male-female relations is the basis for the foundation of human society. It's hardly arbitrary.
    Okay, I think we can all agree that homos, like heteros, each originated from male-female copulation. We as gays are not really trying to change that and ban straight marriage. And I think we gays can all agree that no matter how many rights are conferred upon us, we will never have the ability to reproduce with the one we love.

    Have you taken a look at the planet lately? There is no shortage of male-female replenishment of the species. Hey, if anything, you people should be doing all you can to protect and expand our happy existence. We're here to adopt and raise the fruit of your inability to keep it in your freakin' pants, or at the very least wrap it before you tap it. We have the ability to care for the children that indiscriminate reproduction has left without a stable home and parents to love them.

    Vive les Gheis!
    There is no such thing as separation from God.

  2. #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Posts
    3,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simulatedworld View Post
    But the point is that since the #2 is a purely civil tradition which has been created for the purpose of giving things like tax cuts and visitation rights to two consenting adults who want to merge households, I don't see any reason for the connection to religious tradition in regards to this particular legal arrangement. It's essentially a business agreement; I think a lot of people are upset about this issue mainly because the government had to use the word "marriage" to describe it--but understand that marriage in legal terms is not the same thing as marriage in religious terms.
    Exactly.

    The truth is gays are fighting for half a marriage as it is. There isn't a single state that provides federal benefits to same-sex couples. They're extended some legal benefits, but nothing like heterosexual marriage. Even less rights are given for civil unions. So, achieving the full title of marriage in legal terminology, is only one step of a very long process.

  3. #73
    Guerilla Urbanist Brendan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    911

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cogdecree View Post
    Now this gets interesting, should popular rulings be overturned at 70+%?
    If popular ruling of 70+% violates the Constitution, then yes. Such is the Supreme Court's freaking job description.

    If a national ballot yielded 90% of voters in favor of doing away with the Constitution, should that decision be allowed to stand?

    Quote Originally Posted by cogdecree View Post
    Also legislative judges have more power and are faster than the prevous safeguards for overturing a president. Should their be better safeguards over legislative Judges?
    I think two seperate branches of government are doing the trick just fine... As they have for 220 years.


    And dude, I'm not trying to flame you or engage in ad hominem, but could you please proofread your posts? I'm having a hard time understanding what you're asking or asserting in half of your posts.
    There is no such thing as separation from God.

  4. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Posts
    3,917

    Default

    Vermont Legalizes Gay Marriage With Veto Override

    MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — Vermont on Tuesday became the fourth state to legalize gay marriage — and the first to do so with a legislature's vote.

    The House recorded a dramatic 100-49 vote — the minimum needed — to override Gov. Jim Douglas' veto. Its vote followed a much easier override vote in the Senate, which rebuffed the Republican governor with a vote of 23-5.

    Vermont was the first state to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples and joins Connecticut, Massachusetts and Iowa in giving gays the right to marry. Their approval of gay marriage came from the courts.

    Tuesday morning's legislative action came less than a day after Douglas issued a veto message saying the bill would not improve the lot of gay and lesbian couples because it still would not provide them rights under federal and other states' laws.

    House Speaker Shap Smith's announcement of the vote brought an outburst of jubilation from some of the hundreds packed into the gallery and the lobby outside the House chamber, despite the speaker's admonishment against such displays.

    Among the celebrants in the lobby were former Rep. Robert Dostis, D-Waterbury, and his longtime partner, Chuck Kletecka. Dostis recalled efforts to expand gay rights dating to an anti-discrimination law passed in 1992.

    "It's been a very long battle. It's been almost 20 years to get to this point," Dostis said. "I think finally, most people in Vermont understand that we're a couple like any other couple. We're as good and as bad as any other group of people. And now I think we have a chance to prove ourselves here on forward that we're good members of our community."

    Dostis said he and Kletecka will celebrate their 25th year together in September.

    "Is that a proposal?" Kletecka asked.

    "Yeah," Dostis replied. "Twenty-five years together, I think it's time we finally got married."

    Craig Bensen, a gay marriage opponent who had lobbied unsuccessfully for a nonbinding referendum on the question, said he was disappointed but believed gay marriage opponents were outspent by supporters by a 20-1 margin.

    "The other side had a highly funded, extremely well-oiled machine with all the political leadership except the governor pushing to make this happen," he said. "The fact that it came down to this tight a vote is really astounding."

    Also in the crowd was Michael Feiner, a farmer from Roxbury and gay marriage supporter, who took a break from collecting sap for maple syrup-making to come to the Statehouse.

    "I'm taking a break to come and basically make sure that I was here to witness history," he said.

    The House had initially passed the bill last week with a 95-52 vote.

    The Associated Press: Vermont legalizes gay marriage with veto override

    4 down!

  5. #75
    Guerilla Urbanist Brendan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Posts
    911

    Default

    There is no such thing as separation from God.

  6. #76
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    omg. I can't believe they mustered enough votes to override the veto -- at last count, it seemed that wasn't an option.

    I bet Tennessee and Ohio are next. (NOT)
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #77
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Posts
    3,917

    Default

    ^ Yes.

    I wonder what the CA Judges are thinking right now.

  8. #78
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Posts
    3,917

    Default

    Just when you thought it couldn't get any better...


    D.C. Council Votes to Recognize Other States' Gay Marriages

    The D.C. Council voted today to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, on the same day that Vermont became the fourth state to legalize same-sex unions.

    Domestic partnerships are already legal in the nation's capital. But yesterday's vote, billed as an important milestone in gay rights, explicitly recognizes relocated gay married couples as married.

    The initial vote was 12-0. The unanimous vote sets the stage for future debate on legalizing same-sex marriage in the District and a clash with Congress, which approves the city's laws under Home Rule. The council is expected to take a final vote on the legislation next month.

    Council member Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), who is gay, called the amendment a matter of "basic fairness."

    The city's laws on same-sex unions have been murky, he explained. Couples ask, he said, "Is my marriage valid in D.C.? For years now, it has not been clear."

    "It's high time we send a clear, unequivocal message to those persons of the same sex and married in another jurisdiction that their marriage is valid in D.C.," said Graham, who added, "I hope this city recognizes this is a human rights struggle."

    Council member David A. Catania (I-At Large), who is also gay, predicted it was only a matter of time before the council also takes up a bill to legalize same-sex marriage in the District. "It's no secret that I have been working on legislation that would take us further," he said. "This is the march toward human rights and equality. This is not the march toward special rights. This is the equal march and that march is coming here."

    Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), who has been chipping away at barriers for same-sex couples for years, said he saw the legislation as one that is in keeping with the city's laws. "Some are saying it's an important step. I am saying it's a simple step," said Mendelson, who authored the legislation.

    Council member Harry Thomas Jr. (D-Ward 5) called the amendment "long overdue."

    "We as a council need to stand in the right place and take the gray area out,"
    D.C. Council Votes to Recognize Other States' Gay Marriages - washingtonpost.com


    WOOT! When it rains, it pours.

  9. #79
    Senior Member ceecee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    9,732

    Default

    This is wonderful news!
    I like to rock n' roll all night and *part* of every day. I usually have errands... I can only rock from like 1-3.

  10. #80
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    INxJ
    Posts
    3,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ceecee View Post
    This is wonderful news!
    Yes! I'm unable to properly express how excited I am.

Similar Threads

  1. India Supreme Court reopens case on decriminalising gay sex
    By Olm the Water King in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-02-2016, 10:15 AM
  2. Iowa supreme court upholds woman's firing for being too attractive.
    By Magic Poriferan in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 12-24-2012, 05:24 PM
  3. Texas GOP Platform: Criminalize Gay Marriage and Ban Sodomy
    By Ginkgo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 129
    Last Post: 07-05-2010, 10:40 PM
  4. Two Countries Overturn Gay Military Ban
    By 01011010 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 03-07-2009, 09:51 PM
  5. Gay marriage, adoption, related issues -- Take 2
    By Zergling in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-10-2008, 01:10 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO