- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Federal Judge rules Kentucky must recognize gay marriages from other states
Posted on 2/12/14 at 9:51 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 2/12/14 at 9:51 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i believe in gay marriage, but the methods being used to achieve this goal are terrible and i cannot support them
The courts are the only way to go in a lot of these states. Activists are putting referendums on the ballot in states where there is a path to do this like Oregon, Ohio, and Michigan. In many other states however, even in states where gay marriage would be likely to win like Wisconsin, it is impossible to go that route. Many states require legislation to go through the legislatures for two consecutive years before the the state's citizens can vote on it. In states where the GOP (and religious right) controls the legislature this will never be allowed to be voted on. Courts ARE THE ONLY RECOURSE.
2
Posted on 2/12/14 at 9:55 pm to Toddy
going through courts is fine. relying on courts destroying legal precedents and creating rights for groups that others don't enjoy is terrible. the reason why using the ends to justify the means for a particular issue is that "the means" remain
just see how this is already being expanded/developed in some states, where people must transact business with those they do not wish to transact business with. that's a destruction of liberty
just see how this is already being expanded/developed in some states, where people must transact business with those they do not wish to transact business with. that's a destruction of liberty
Posted on 2/12/14 at 10:38 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
just see how this is already being expanded/developed in some states, where people must transact business with those they do not wish to transact business with. that's a destruction of liberty
so you are okay with realtors not selling homes to "some" minorities because of their skin color?
This post was edited on 2/12/14 at 10:39 pm
Posted on 2/12/14 at 10:40 pm to asurob1
Remember how the homos were saying a few years ago that all they wanted was to get it on the ballot.
30 straight losses later that sure as Hell went away.
typical lying liberals
30 straight losses later that sure as Hell went away.
typical lying liberals
Posted on 2/12/14 at 10:42 pm to asurob1
How about this guy?
We don't serve your kind here.
An Idaho Republican can’t think of anyone in his state who has been forced to render aid to a gay or lesbian person against their will, and he’d like to keep it that way.
Rep. Lynn Luker outlined a proposal Tuesday backed by his conservative Christian allies to shield religious people from the threat of losing their professional licenses for refusing service or employment to anyone they conclude violates their religious beliefs.
See because unlike you I can see how allowing businesses to not serve gays because you know icky gay can easily be expanded to not serving mexicans because they are brown or jewish people because they have big noses and call it "religious freedom."
We don't serve your kind here.
An Idaho Republican can’t think of anyone in his state who has been forced to render aid to a gay or lesbian person against their will, and he’d like to keep it that way.
Rep. Lynn Luker outlined a proposal Tuesday backed by his conservative Christian allies to shield religious people from the threat of losing their professional licenses for refusing service or employment to anyone they conclude violates their religious beliefs.
See because unlike you I can see how allowing businesses to not serve gays because you know icky gay can easily be expanded to not serving mexicans because they are brown or jewish people because they have big noses and call it "religious freedom."
Posted on 2/12/14 at 10:42 pm to gthog61
quote:
Remember how the homos were saying a few years ago that all they wanted was to get it on the ballot.
30 straight losses later that sure as Hell went away.
typical lying liberals
Exhibit A
Posted on 2/12/14 at 10:54 pm to Mickey Goldmill
The government needs to GTFO of marriage.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:06 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
The government needs to GTFO of marriage.
Are you saying the Federal government, courts, states or all of the above should GTFO out of marriage?
Since marriage is used by so many government entities, it would be kinda hard for them to gtfo.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:06 pm to asurob1
quote:
so you are okay with realtors not selling homes to "some" minorities because of their skin color?
Private business, don't care. They can do whatever they want. You do not have a right to products for sale or employment in the private sector. It must be freely given. If the owner, employer doesn't want to do business with you or employ you, then that's the end of it.
Private property rights trump laws based on morality.
Surely, you have a problem with morality based laws since you and I agree that a gay marriage ban is a morality based law. Right?
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:10 pm to Socratics
quote:
Are you saying the Federal government, courts, states or all of the above should GTFO out of marriage?
yes
quote:
Since marriage is used by so many government entities,
it's time we admit this failure of government
quote:
it would be kinda hard for them to gtfo.
so because government failure compounds, we should use this as an excuse to never restrict government?
why is this argument never used by people attacking current restrictions on government? why isn't this argument accepted by those fighting for the ability of gays to marry? i mean do you know how hard it will be to change all THOSE marriage laws? they should just give up!
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:10 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
The government needs to GTFO of marriage.
X 1,000Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:11 pm to asurob1
Linking to rawstory is like linking to drudge.
Please link a more credible source please.
Please link a more credible source please.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:11 pm to asurob1
if people want to be stupid to their own detriment, who am i to use government to restrict their stupidity?
as a person and businessman who doesn't discriminate based on race, i welcome the increased market share
as a person and businessman who doesn't discriminate based on race, i welcome the increased market share
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:13 pm to Socratics
quote:
Are you saying the Federal government, courts, states or all of the above should GTFO out of marriage?
Yes
quote:
Since marriage is used by so many government entities, it would be kinda hard for them to gtfo.
So the solution to government ineptitude is more government ineptitude?
This post was edited on 2/12/14 at 11:15 pm
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:20 pm to SlowFlowPro
All of this is a lost cause. It's now about forcing all to accept it at all cost. NOT about rights. It really is not about state's rights either. It is about your personal property and private business. Where ever it is not accepted, you have have no option but to accept.
I hope we are not all so ignorant to think that churches will not be forced go against what they believe.
I hope we are not all so ignorant to think that churches will not be forced go against what they believe.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:22 pm to darkhorse
quote:
I hope we are not all so ignorant to think that churches will not be forced go against what they believe.
Ah, the slippery slope fallacy.
There is no reason to believe churches will be forced by law to marry gay couples against their beliefs. Public accommodation laws dont pertain to religious organizations.
I shall now await the contraception red herring.
This post was edited on 2/12/14 at 11:24 pm
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:27 pm to Roger Klarvin
Little irk of mine, I just don't like white backgrounds in dark posts so I made your sig transparent.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:28 pm to darkhorse
quote:
I hope we are not all so ignorant to think that churches will not be forced go against what they believe.
please don't break your face as you slip down that slope.
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:30 pm to Sentrius
quote:
Private business, don't care. They can do whatever they want. You do not have a right to products for sale or employment in the private sector. It must be freely given. If the owner, employer doesn't want to do business with you or employ you, then that's the end of it.
Of course you don't. You are allowed to enter any business you want and they will serve you.
quote:
Private property rights trump laws based on morality.
no actually they don't. Which is why we have laws against housing discrimination.
quote:
Surely, you have a problem with morality based laws since you and I agree that a gay marriage ban is a morality based law. Right?
I have a problem with any law that promotes dumbassery ;-).
Posted on 2/12/14 at 11:31 pm to Sentrius
quote:
Linking to rawstory is like linking to drudge.
Please link a more credible source please.
ABC News credible enough for you?
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News