| Political Talk |
| Return to Board • Menu • Bottom |  Page 4 of 4 |
| Message |
re: The trajectory of the gay marriage issuequote: If they touch my Church with government backing, this country loses my support. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: Nope. Pulled it from the 9th Circuit decision of Perry v. Brown. quote: See above. Thanks for trying to be smart though. You play at it well. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: Have fun with that. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: For the life of me... I don't see how anyone can begin a discrimination discussion around marriage without first recognizing that the people that are being discriminated against are single people. Marriage is a legal union for the expressed purpose of granting certain privileges. Privileges unavailable to single people. Quite frankly... the idea that gay people want to join in on the discrimination, rather than correcting the problem at its root... is quite baffling. Married people have privileges that single people don't. This post was edited on 5/9 at 10:36 pm Reply • Back to Top |
quote: Obviously I understand you weren't personally the one who pulled it from their own ass. quote: The above had absolutely nothing to do with the point I made that you were responding to. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: You do realize the 9th circuit struck down Prop 8 right? And they're the most liberal circuit court of appeals in the country? quote: I was just telling you where my post came from. And your little interacial marriage discussion of Loving v. Virginia is based on marriage being a fundamental right. The same court said gay marriage was not included in that decision. Just trying to help you out because you seem to think that I was just making this stuff up. I wasn't, next time I'll link it so general knowledge can be bestowed to you too. Now gfy. This post was edited on 5/9 at 10:40 pm Reply • Back to Top |
| I'm not referring to Loving v Virginia or Perry v. Brown or any fricking court cases! Jesus what is wrong with you lawyers? You're arguing that something isn't a Civil Rights issue until the courts recognize it as one? You don't see the circular reasoning you're using? Perhaps there is some sort of legal definition of "civil right's issue" that I am not familiar with, but that is obviously not what I am talking about. All you're doing is using circular logic to argue semantics. This post was edited on 5/9 at 11:01 pm Reply • Back to Top |
| Then I'm being discrminated against for not being issued a medical license Reply • Back to Top |
| You don't see difference in trying to argue that marriage is a right vs. arguing that getting a medical license is a right? We can't use reason to evaluate these things? We have to use legal definitions? Reply • Back to Top |
quote: They already have a right from the government to marry. A gay man has just as much a right as me to marry a woman. Reply • Back to Top |
quote: And a black person had just as much right to marry another black person before interracial marriage was legal. They are gay. It is an immutable characteristic. Telling them to marry a woman is ridiculous. This post was edited on 5/9 at 10:57 pm Reply • Back to Top |
quote: not a lawyer, just aware. quote: I'm saying that I don't think the courts will see it as one. And I don't think it's discrimination. I support gay marriage though. I don't care who wants to get married or not. You're the one all frustrated about the issue. I don't vote on social issues. I'm not an idiot. Reply • Back to Top |
| Its not a right tho... So, a state law is where it should lie Reply • Back to Top |
quote: You're a smart guy. You can really come up with better response than a childish retort like this. Reply • Back to Top |
quote:or conversely it's recognition through government benefit of any marriage that constitutes the Constitutional breech? Reply • Back to Top |
quote:  It's bull shite the crap that lifelong single people do not get the benefits. When they leave their possessions to a loved one, such as a nephew or niece, the state grabs more and taxes out the ass. Reply • Back to Top • Refresh |
| Return to Board | ||
 Page 4 of 4   | ||
on 5/9 at 10:30 pm to 
on 5/9 at 10:30 pm to 
on 5/9 at 10:34 pm to 
on 5/10 at 12:14 am to