User Tag List

First 891011 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 108

  1. #91
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    It matters because gays make up about 1% of the population.
    As someone who allegedly supports SSM, you should know that, even if these numbers mattered (which they do not), it is not a matter of gays vs. anti-gays, but one of supporters vs. opponents of equal rights (for homosexuals). In the same vein, even though am not physically disabled, I believe public buildings should be built disability-friendly, and paid for by tax money.

  2. #92
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    As someone who allegedly supports SSM, you should know that, even if these numbers mattered (which they do not), it is not a matter of gays vs. anti-gays, but one of supporters vs. opponents of equal rights (for homosexuals). In the same vein, even though am not physically disabled, I believe public buildings should be built disability-friendly, and paid for by tax money.
    From a legal perspective, whether a law burdens 10 million people or 50 million people is important. For the sake of cultural discourse that point is not important at all. From a political perspective the only thing that matters is the number of supporters just like you said.

    But when constraining rights, the aim of SCOTUS is always to burden the smallest number of people in the least burdensome way possible. And SCOTUS plays a huge role in our political system, that is important.

    But yes, lay people could care less about the numbers. For them it's basically an MSM popularity contest.

  3. #93
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    From a legal perspective, whether a law burdens 10 million people or 50 million people is important.
    What is the legal definition of a burden? And when did this become a legal discussion?

  4. #94
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    What is the legal definition of a burden?
    From the wiki article regarding the Free Exercise Clause:

    This interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause continued into the 1960s and the ascendancy of the Warren Court under chief justice Earl Warren. Applying a new standard of "strict scrutiny" in various areas of civil rights law, the Court began to apply this standard to the First Amendment religion clauses as well, reading the Free Exercise Clause to require accommodation of religious conduct except where a state could show a compelling interest and no less burdensome means to achieve that end. One example was Sherbert v. Verner, where the Court overturned the state Employment Security Commission's decision to deny unemployment benefits to a practicing member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church who was forced out of a job after her employer adopted a 6-day work week, which would have required her to work on Saturdays against the dictates of her religion. As Justice William Brennan stated for the majority, "to condition the availability of benefits upon this appellant's willingness to violate a cardinal principle of her religious faith effectively penalizes the free exercise of her constitutional liberties." This test was used through the years of the Burger Court, including particularly in the landmark case of Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972).
    From Black's Law dictionary:
    Theme, core idea; A heavy load; A responsibility, onus; A cause of worry; To encumber with a burden (in any of the noun senses of the word).
    It became a legal discussion when you stated that the numbers don't matter.

  5. #95
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    [Definitions]

    It became a legal discussion when you stated that the numbers don't matter.
    SSM is no burden on you or anyone who is not getting a SSM. No one has to violate their religious principles, especially, as was the original topic, 30 years from now, when people will have moved on.

  6. #96
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    SSM is no burden on you or anyone who is not getting a SSM. No one has to violate their religious principles, especially, as was the original topic, 30 years from now, when people will have moved on.
    Being forced to resign is a burden. Which is the topic of this thread.

  7. #97
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    Being forced to resign is a burden. Which is the topic of this thread.
    He was not forced to resign for his beliefs but because he was bad press.

  8. #98
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    He was not forced to resign for his beliefs but because he was bad press.
    He got bad press because of his beliefs.

    His beliefs would not have mattered if he supported green peace with a $1000 donation.

    He also got bad press because someone decided that allowing someone (regardless of how qualified) to run mozilla who had a differing opinion on SSM was unacceptable. This person decided that a witch hunt was preferable to live and let live.

    A growing culture of conformity on cultural issues emboldened this person to publicly destroy a man for donating to a cause 6 years ago.

  9. #99
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    He got bad press because of his beliefs.

    His beliefs would not have mattered if he supported green peace with a $1000 donation.

    He also got bad press because someone decided that allowing someone (regardless of how qualified) to run mozilla who had a differing opinion on SSM was unacceptable. This person decided that a witch hunt was preferable to live and let live.

    A growing culture of conformity on cultural issues emboldened this person to publicly destroy a man for donating to a cause 6 years ago.
    So, clearly not a legal matter, nor concerned with numbers.

    Also, I rather think it is a culture of political correctness, which I have little love for myself. But it is nothing new. Rather, the content of what is politically correct has changed. Many current taboos, however, will have ceased to be 30 years from now. By then, there will be new ones. You can only hope (and, through your work, try to make sure) they will be more in line with your personal ideology. God forbid it would be perfectly acceptable to question another's religious beliefs then!

  10. #100
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    So, clearly not a legal matter, nor concerned with numbers.

    Also, I rather think it is a culture of political correctness, which I have little love for myself. But it is nothing new. Rather, the content of what is politically correct has changed. Many current taboos, however, will have ceased to be 30 years from now. By then, there will be new ones. You can only hope (and, through your work, try to make sure) they will be more in line with your personal ideology. God forbid it would be perfectly acceptable to question another's religious beliefs then!
    Given that the SSM debate in the country currently involves many court cases including the one from new mexico SCOTUS declined to hear, and that it is impossible to untangle the Eich situation from the greater questions involved in the other SSM cases currently before the court, I found it relevant to explain why the numbers matter with regard to SSM.

    If the debate is strictly limited to the Eich case, then yes all that matters is the number of supporters in the tech industry, but this debate hasn't been that narrow.

    Forgive me if my response was beyond the scope of the discussion you're aiming for.

    To your other point, I think think we are quickly reaching peak progressive in this country (at least for this generation). I would not be surprised to see the pendulum swing the other way from about 2014 to 2024 (that being the 2014 midterms, 2016 presidential, 2018 midterms, 2020 presidential)

Similar Threads

  1. Type and the Use of Emoticons
    By MerkW in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 07-09-2010, 12:59 PM
  2. [INFP] INFPs and the Lack of Initiative
    By nolla in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 09-02-2008, 01:38 PM
  3. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 07-30-2008, 08:38 PM
  4. "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" review...
    By The Ü™ in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-22-2007, 03:34 AM

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