Breaking: Supreme Court rules SSM a legal right
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 10:27:05 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Breaking: Supreme Court rules SSM a legal right
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15
Author Topic: Breaking: Supreme Court rules SSM a legal right  (Read 25475 times)
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,960
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #325 on: July 01, 2015, 04:06:24 AM »

God, this "debate" is still going on? Get over it, everyone.
Logged
Türkisblau
H_Wallace
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #326 on: July 01, 2015, 04:09:01 AM »

CCSF is like the George Wallace of gay marriage, if George Wallace was black.
Logged
Middle-aged Europe
Old Europe
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,178
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #327 on: July 01, 2015, 04:17:07 AM »

I have not been able to sleep for days.

Honestly, that's probably a sign that you worked yourself up over this matter. How about taking a break from the issue for a while? This would include stop posting in this thread of course.
Logged
CountryClassSF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,530


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #328 on: July 01, 2015, 04:26:26 AM »

I have not been able to sleep for days.

Honestly, that's probably a sign that you worked yourself up over this matter. How about taking a break from the issue for a while? This would include stop posting in this thread of course.

You're probably right.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #329 on: July 01, 2015, 07:44:01 AM »

CCSF is like the George Wallace of gay marriage, if George Wallace was black.
He is, but does a comedian have to do with this?

Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,230
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #330 on: July 01, 2015, 11:56:41 AM »

Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #331 on: July 01, 2015, 09:32:38 PM »

I split the latest batch of CCSF-related thread derailing into a separate thread. If people must discuss CCSF and his views on SSM, do so there.  And by people, I include CCSF.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #332 on: July 01, 2015, 10:02:38 PM »

OK. It's all but over. All that is necessary is for some Court to decide that in the last few places in which public officials still resist SSM that the legality of SSM is the law of the land.

...You may have been surprised that I was careful to avoid 'whiting out' states immediately after Obergfell v. Hodges  unless the states were mentioned in the ruling or that state officials conceded that the decisions applied to their states.  That officials of Arkansas, Georgia, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota recognized that the decision applied to them I white those states out. Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas officials resisted. Such established a retroactive defense of my caution, if not wisdom.

One definitive statement by the US Supreme Court will establish beyond any doubt that SSM is a legal right in America -- in all 50 states.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #333 on: July 01, 2015, 10:07:09 PM »

PPP just released a poll on Michigan on acceptance of SSM.  It is safe to assume that an SSM ban was doomed in Michigan even without Obergfell v. Hodges.

After the fact in Michigan...

With gay marriage legal in Michigan now voters want to take the next step and ban discrimination against LGBT people in employment and housing. 68% support a law making it illegal to fire or deny housing in Michigan because someone is gay, lesbian, or transgender to only 25% who are opposed. 56% of voters say they would 'strongly' support such legislation.

....

Voters are also quite opposed to two anti-gay GOP legislative efforts going on right now. Only
34% think adoption agencies that receive money from the state should be allowed to deny
services to families they say violate their religious  beliefs, with 52% saying they should not be
allowed to do that. Independents are particularly opposed to that legislation at 29/55. 

....

There's even less support for the proposal to make  it so that only clergy can perform weddings in the state, making it harder for same sex couples to get married. Only 16% of voters support that to 69% who are opposed and the opposition on that is bipartisan...

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2015/PPP_Release_MI_7115.pdf

The State legislature was far behind the People. A referendum on SSM might have passed in Michigan in 2014 had one been offered; by 2016 such would have been a certainty. 
Logged
eric82oslo
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,501
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #334 on: July 02, 2015, 12:49:53 PM »

Sure I've made no secret as to the fact that the ruling upset me. I'm saying that some people are definitely advocating those things. And I believe as a result people of faith should start a voter registration drive.
This is one example: http://time.com/3939143/nows-the-time-to-end-tax-exemptions-for-religious-institutions/

Since this upsets you so much. If you were to have a child at some point in your life and he happened to be gay and came out to you. Would you kick him out of your house?
Logged
CountryClassSF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,530


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #335 on: July 02, 2015, 02:56:14 PM »



Since this upsets you so much. If you were to have a child at some point in your life and he happened to be gay and came out to you. Would you kick him out of your house?

Unequivocally no. Unconditional love and support.
Logged
eric82oslo
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,501
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.00, S: -5.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #336 on: July 02, 2015, 04:38:37 PM »



Since this upsets you so much. If you were to have a child at some point in your life and he happened to be gay and came out to you. Would you kick him out of your house?

Unequivocally no. Unconditional love and support.

But you would hate the fact that he was gay.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #337 on: July 03, 2015, 08:05:04 AM »

This is off topic but relevant in view of a message that I received. I got an explicit, pornographic  image that was the sole content of the message from personal someone identifying himself as Jim Roberts. This person had never posted anything on one of the Forms.

I deleted the image because it could be harmful to any minor who might see it. We need remember that there are minors using this site so that they can, among other things, get information for class reports and other assignments. 

A warning to "Jim Roberts": it is a violation of federal law to transmit a sexual image potentially harmful to children to any media in which children might be viewers. No, this was not plain and simple nudity as out of the centerfold of a men's magazine. This was far more troublesome.

...I have been concerned with the ethics and politics of same-sex marriage because of my desire for a better world even for people who have a significant difference from me. Now that the struggle for same-sex marriage has become an all-but-done deal, it is literal history. Whatever slight role I have had in my written support of same-sex marriage, I might have cause for pride even if it is to support something that I would never do myself.   

On the other side, transmission of pornographic images as an insult to me (or anyone else) for the side that I took in a debate is inexcusable. It would be similarly inexcusable to transmit such images as an insult to people on the other side as in-the-face insults.

Let's not gloat. Other issues will confront us soon enough. Many who opposed same-sex marriage thought that they did so for the best interests of America as a whole.
Logged
NeverAgain
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,659
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #338 on: July 03, 2015, 08:27:20 AM »

This is off topic but relevant in view of a message that I received. I got an explicit, pornographic  image that was the sole content of the message from personal someone identifying himself as Jim Roberts. This person had never posted anything on one of the Forms.

I deleted the image because it could be harmful to any minor who might see it. We need remember that there are minors using this site so that they can, among other things, get information for class reports and other assignments. 

A warning to "Jim Roberts": it is a violation of federal law to transmit a sexual image potentially harmful to children to any media in which children might be viewers. No, this was not plain and simple nudity as out of the centerfold of a men's magazine. This was far more troublesome.
...I have been concerned with the ethics and politics of same-sex marriage because of my desire for a better world even for people who have a significant difference from me. Now that the struggle for same-sex marriage has become an all-but-done deal, it is literal history. Whatever slight role I have had in my written support of same-sex marriage, I might have cause for pride even if it is to support something that I would never do myself.   

On the other side, transmission of pornographic images as an insult to me (or anyone else) for the side that I took in a debate is inexcusable. It would be similarly inexcusable to transmit such images as an insult to people on the other side as in-the-face insults.

Let's not gloat. Other issues will confront us soon enough. Many who opposed same-sex marriage thought that they did so for the best interests of America as a whole.
Sock/Troll nothing against your position on SSM.
Logged
SNJ1985
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,274
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.19, S: 7.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #339 on: July 03, 2015, 10:20:59 AM »
« Edited: July 03, 2015, 10:23:08 AM by Thomas from NJ »

why is it so hard to understand that those people's views are objectively bad?

They're not. You are not the sole arbiter of morality. That honor belongs solely to God, who has declared that homosexuality is sinful (Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9).

You are the one with the objectively bad views on this matter; as you have exalted something which God hath called an abomination, and have condemned His righteous moral edicts regarding the matter. You have called evil good, and good evil (read Isaiah 5:20).

The Bible says in Leviticus 19:17 that in order to truly love your neighbor, you must rebuke him and not suffer sin upon him. That means warning your neighbors that they are sinning, warning them about the nature of their sin, and warning them about the consequences of their sin. That is the loving thing to do, just as it is loving to warn a cigarette smoker about the dangers of cigarettes. It is not loving to lie to them and coddle them in it.
Logged
SUSAN CRUSHBONE
a Person
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,735
Antarctica


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #340 on: July 03, 2015, 10:36:17 AM »

why is it so hard to understand that those people's views are objectively bad?

They're not. You are not the sole arbiter of morality. That honor belongs solely to God, who has declared that homosexuality is sinful (Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9).

You are the one with the objectively bad views on this matter; as you have exalted something which God hath called an abomination, and have condemned His righteous moral edicts regarding the matter. You have called evil good, and good evil (read Isaiah 5:20).

The Bible says in Leviticus 19:17 that in order to truly love your neighbor, you must rebuke him and not suffer sin upon him. That means warning your neighbors that they are sinning, warning them about the nature of their sin, and warning them about the consequences of their sin. That is the loving thing to do, just as it is loving to warn a cigarette smoker about the dangers of cigarettes. It is not loving to lie to them and coddle them in it.

i'm not interested in your mental gymnastics.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #341 on: July 03, 2015, 10:54:07 PM »
« Edited: July 04, 2015, 11:20:39 AM by pbrower2a »

Sock/Troll nothing against your position on SSM.

The creep sent me an unsolicited pornographic image, an extreme violation of Forum policy. I hope that nobody else got such a message. It's the unwelcome porn that is the problem -- and not whether the fellow despises me or my positions.  
 
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,717
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #342 on: July 04, 2015, 12:31:37 AM »

Well, it's interesting that you would come in here to blame it on the ruling. Undecided
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #343 on: July 04, 2015, 11:55:28 AM »

why is it so hard to understand that those people's views are objectively bad?

They're not. You are not the sole arbiter of morality. That honor belongs solely to God, who has declared that homosexuality is sinful (Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9).

But if homosexuality is intractable, then God is responsible or culpable in its existence. Unlike such blatant sins as murder, rape, theft, arson, drug-dealing, or perversion of justice, homosexuality is not for us to judge.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

God somehow missed one of the most horrible crimes possible -- slavery. The Bible says nothing about slavery except that slaves are to serve their masters. So is it wrong to help a slave escape hereditary bondage?

Today most of us recognize the 'conductors' of the Underground Railroad as heroes. Today the only qualms that we can have with the hanging of Fritz Sauckel,  the most horrible procurer of slaves in the twentieth century is opposition to the death penalty.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sin? That ranges from minor indulgences (a sweet roll) to some of the most horrendous crimes possible (the Holocaust, slave trafficking). How is anyone in a position to tell a mobster to quit his destructive, exploitative activities?
Logged
SNJ1985
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,274
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.19, S: 7.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #344 on: July 04, 2015, 12:52:17 PM »
« Edited: July 04, 2015, 01:05:02 PM by Thomas from NJ »

God somehow missed one of the most horrible crimes possible -- slavery. The Bible says nothing about slavery except that slaves are to serve their masters. So is it wrong to help a slave escape hereditary bondage?

Today most of us recognize the 'conductors' of the Underground Railroad as heroes. Today the only qualms that we can have with the hanging of Fritz Sauckel,  the most horrible procurer of slaves in the twentieth century is opposition to the death penalty.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

There is a key difference between the slavery that was practiced in the Bible and the slavery that was practiced in the United States. The slavery practiced in the Bible was not based on race. People weren't enslaved just because they were of a certain skin color. In addition, both the Old and New Testaments condemned ''man-stealing'', which is how most slaves were ultimately brought to the US:

''And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.'' - Exodus 21:16

''But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;'' - 1 Timothy 1:8-10
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,841
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #345 on: July 04, 2015, 02:16:24 PM »

God somehow missed one of the most horrible crimes possible -- slavery. The Bible says nothing about slavery except that slaves are to serve their masters. So is it wrong to help a slave escape hereditary bondage?

Today most of us recognize the 'conductors' of the Underground Railroad as heroes. Today the only qualms that we can have with the hanging of Fritz Sauckel,  the most horrible procurer of slaves in the twentieth century is opposition to the death penalty.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html

There is a key difference between the slavery that was practiced in the Bible and the slavery that was practiced in the United States. The slavery practiced in the Bible was not based on race. People weren't enslaved just because they were of a certain skin color. In addition, both the Old and New Testaments condemned ''man-stealing'', which is how most slaves were ultimately brought to the US:

''And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.'' - Exodus 21:16

''But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;'' - 1 Timothy 1:8-10


The buyers of slaves are as culpable as the sellers. This applies as much to those who deal in sexual slaves (the victims are typically women or girls) as to those who the slave-traffickers of Africans to the New World.
Logged
CountryClassSF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,530


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #346 on: July 05, 2015, 04:57:15 AM »

But you would hate the fact that he was gay.
No, I would not.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,578
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #347 on: July 05, 2015, 02:25:06 PM »


If he chose to enter into a gay marriage, would you still be fully supportive?
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #348 on: July 06, 2015, 01:21:58 AM »

This is for the right-wing. Marriage equality is here.



More like usurpation of religious liberty and states rights. This fight is and will not be over.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #349 on: July 06, 2015, 06:00:15 AM »

Here is the thing I just really don't get, and that is why people need a government ruling to back up their religious beliefs?  Doesn't that violate the First Amendment?

I mean, I really don't get this idea of how if we have legal equality between straight and gay people it is somehow harming the freedoms of Christian America.  Nobody ever openly calls divorce laws "anti-Christian" or how bad and evil it is that people aren't thrown in jail for committing straight adultery.  What makes the concept of legal (emphasis) equality between straight and gay people so much worse?

To Paraphrase: If you don't like Gay Marriage don't get one.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 13 queries.