Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost” - Page 5 - TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
Jake88
George Mason Fan
Member since Apr 2005
8451 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


Despite his obvious distaste for the Right, they did, in many, but not all cases, keep dragging the pond keeping it in the public discourse.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
NC_Tigah
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2003
51804 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

NC, you keep arguing as if they are not denied that right.
What right?
quote:

Can a gay couple get married in Louisiana
Yes
quote:

and have it recognized by the state?
Define recognition. Yes I'm being serious. Because therein lies the question as to ""right"".






Back to top
OMLandshark
Ole Miss Fan
Member since Apr 2009
38288 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

Then move to Russia or China. Otherwise, deal with In God We Trust that has been legislated and will continue.


Not that you're likely to believe this, but In God We Trust has only been on the currency since the 50s, not when Jefferson and Washington were around.






Back to top
NC_Tigah
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2003
51804 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

Not that you're likely to believe this, but In God We Trust has only been on the currency since the 50s
You're right. He isn't likely to believe it.








Back to top
doubleb
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
6420 posts

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


Marriage Has long been a religious and a civil institution.

Now it is being reinvented to include arrangements where people of the same sex can have the same social, and legal benefits as men and women have long enjoyed.

As for the government staying out of the so called marriage business, that would be hard to do. Taxes, benefits, inheritances, obligations of parents, social security, and pension issues all revolve around marriage and the fact the govt. recognized that a married couple was a union (or a corporation of sorts).

The government by law has defined marriage in order to foster an orderly society.

Not any two people living in the same dwelling can say they are married. You have to make it official (legal) and there are different ways to do that. You don't need a church or a religious institution to make it happen.

Religious opposition to calling gay unions gay marriages is there because many religious people do not consider what they have (a marriage between a man and a woman) the same as two people of the same sex, and for that reason they get upset as if the government and other forces are taking something special from them or that society is somehow diluting what they have(had).

If you consider how government and the agnostics in our country have slowly but surely changed things to fit their idea of how society should be; you can understand why people who believe marriage is something special and not just two people living together. Look how they took prayer out of schools, made abortion on the law of the land, made religious symbols offensive, and now this and anyone can understand why people are upset.

But like some here have posted, what have "we" lost? Really nothing, it's just that changes like this will certainly lead to other changes which will cost us something somehow. They always do.






Back to top
Jake88
George Mason Fan
Member since Apr 2005
8451 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


You're thinking of "under God" in the Pledge.





Back to top
OMLandshark
Ole Miss Fan
Member since Apr 2009
38288 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


Double checked and it started in the 1860s for coins and paper currency in the 1950s. Thought they were established at the same time. My mistake. Still, it wasn't around for our founding fathers.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
OMLandshark
Ole Miss Fan
Member since Apr 2009
38288 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

You're thinking of "under God" in the Pledge.


No I was thinking of paper currency, which I assumed also started "In God We Trust" on coins.






Back to top
DvlsAdvocat
Alabama Fan
Your Mom's House, AL
Member since Jul 2007
24491 posts

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


Everybody knows money is our one true god...this just codifies it.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
VOR
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
New Orleans
Member since Apr 2009
41203 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

What right?


The "right" to be married and have that marriage recognized by the state. Are you taking the position that that recognition is a "privilege" granted by the state? I think there are more than a few Americans who would take umbrage.

quote:

Can a gay couple get married in Louisiana
Yes
quote:
and have it recognized by the state?
Define recognition. Yes I'm being serious. Because therein lies the question as to ""right"".



Well, I'm not sure where you're going but I'll play along. The state is not going to send in the cops to break up a gay marriage ceremony. However, that marriage will not be recognized by the state of Louisiana, and the civil effects of marriage will not follow.

Okay, now what? I think I know where you may be headed, but surprise me.






Back to top
doubleb
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
6420 posts

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


The state or the government recognizes marriage because it's akin to a business merger. That's why the government got into the marriage business.

We have a lot of other rights that the government doesn't hardly ever recognize.

Look at this thread, people are exercising their right to free speech and their right to associate with whom they wish. The govt. doesn't care.

If two people want to live together they can do that without the government's permission, recognition, etc.

The argument is whether or not these unions carry the same weight under the law that traditional marriages do. The argument is whether or not government can recognize different groups for special benefits and not give other groups the same benefits under the law. In this case the groups are couples.

From a legal point of view it has nothing to do with love, sex or religion.






Back to top
VOR
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
New Orleans
Member since Apr 2009
41203 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

The argument is whether or not these unions carry the same weight under the law that traditional marriages do. The argument is whether or not government can recognize different groups for special benefits and not give other groups the same benefits under the law. In this case the groups are couples.

From a legal point of view it has nothing to do with love, sex or religion.


Pretty much.






Back to top
NC_Tigah
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2003
51804 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

and the civil effects of marriage will not follow.
but whether or not they are applied to gay couples, those civil effects are still not bestowed on a variety of groups or individuals. That's the point. Are rights normally differentially applied?






Back to top
Lg
Alabama Fan
Hayden, Alabama
Member since Jul 2011
874 posts

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

From a legal point of view it has nothing to do with love, sex or religion.


Then why are the only people to sign a marriage certificate that is recognized as legal, is a government official and a member of the clergy? Am I wrong on this?






Back to top
NC_Tigah
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2003
51804 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

Pretty much.
Well there now. You answered your own question.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
VOR
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
New Orleans
Member since Apr 2009
41203 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

but whether or not they are applied to gay couples, those civil effects are still not bestowed on a variety of groups or individuals. That's the point. Are rights normally differentially applied?


Could you speak plainly and directly as to what you mean and give an example? It could be that I am too dense to follow.

Are you talking about denying those rights to siblings are unions of three or more? If so, haven't we been over that ad nauseum?






Back to top
VOR
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
New Orleans
Member since Apr 2009
41203 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

Then why are the only people to sign a marriage certificate that is recognized as legal, is a government official and a member of the clergy?


A justice of the peace or judge can marry someone. In that case he or she would sign the certificate.

That's something that has been frustrating to me in these debates. Our law defines the term "marriage" BUT IT DOES NOT REQUIRE A CHURCH OR CLERGY TO PERFORM THE CEREMONY.

Therefore, "marriage" at law is purely civil.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
doubleb
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
6420 posts

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

Then why are the only people to sign a marriage certificate that is recognized as legal, is a government official and a member of the clergy? Am I wrong on this?


If you don't go down to the clerk of court and get a mariage license, then the government doesn't have a record of your marriage. If all you have is a piece of paper at home signed by a religious leader, that doesn't make you married in the eyes of the government does it? You have to have the marriage recorded.

IMHO, you can be married in the eyes of God, and not have it recognized by the state.






Back to top
NC_Tigah
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2003
51804 posts
 Online 

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

Could you speak plainly and directly as to what you mean and give an example? It could be that I am too dense to follow.

Are you talking about denying those rights to siblings are unions of three or more? If so, haven't we been over that ad nauseum?
I'm talking about denying those benefits you're referencing as "rights" to everyone outside of couples recognized as married. That is not the way "rights customarily work, is it?






Back to top
Toddy
Ole Miss Fan
Atlanta
Member since Jul 2010
20559 posts

re: Rush Limbaugh on gay marriage: “This issue is lost”


quote:

But like some here have posted, what have "we" lost? Really nothing, it's just that changes like this will certainly lead to other changes which will cost us something somehow. They always do.



Just curious, what exactly will it cost us?






Back to top


Back to top