- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
Posted on 5/25/14 at 9:42 pm to Sentrius
quote:
He's going to lose.
At least he is fighting for the laws the people of the state voted for. I will take that over the gutless pricks we see over and over.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 9:45 pm to KoolHndLuke
Utah's governor is just wasting money. But luckily the gay marriage ban is falling one step at a time. I can't wait to see the reaction when the Bible belt starts falling too 
Posted on 5/25/14 at 9:48 pm to Sentrius
quote:
A law that's unconstitutional, violates the 14th amendment, due process and the equal protection clause.
Where's the argument that sexual orientation is a protected class under the 14th amendment? I'm sure it's out there, but I was wondering if you have a link to a good summary of the Supreme Court's ruling of it under federal law. Or has that happened yet? I know Obama instructed his DOJ to not enforce DOMA, but is that all they're going on at this point in terms of actual action at the federal level? Is there an official interpretation?
BTW, the politics behind the 14th amendment is pretty interesting stuff.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 9:48 pm to IdahoTiger
He's doing what the people of Utah voted him in for. We already have politicians wasting a lot more doing nothing. Whether their law is right or wrong I respect the move.
You can waste your time hoping for the fall of something, it really doesn't matter much to me.
You can waste your time hoping for the fall of something, it really doesn't matter much to me.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 9:57 pm to KoolHndLuke
quote:
At least he is fighting for the laws the people of the state voted for.
I get what you're saying, but we can't pass laws based solely on what the majority wants.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:00 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
I get what you're saying, but we can't pass laws based solely on what the majority wants.
Should this be a state issue?
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:06 pm to TerryDawg03
quote:
Where's the argument that sexual orientation is a protected class under the 14th amendment?
Don't know the specific court reasoning but 14th Amendment is, of course, equal protection under the law. And the equal protection argument is that states are discriminating by not recognizing same sex marriages.
I don't agree with that particular argument because it was always assumed, until about 20 or so years ago, that marriage was a man and a woman. The Constitution has not changed in the interim...public opinion has changed, but that's something that should be reflected through legislators. Kind of like how life without parole for a 17 year old murderer is suddenly "cruel and unusual".
I voted against the Louisiana ban in 2004...but I don't buy that it violates the 14th.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:07 pm to FightinTigersDammit
quote:
Should this be a state issue?
I think it should be.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:09 pm to LordSaintly
quote:
I think it should be.
Agree. The most relevant analogy is first cousin marriages. Recognized in a few states, but not valid in most. And the reason for opposing them is the same--people find them sinful or "icky" or both.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:14 pm to weagle99
I really wish people weren't so gay about everything.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:17 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
Agree. The most relevant analogy is first cousin marriages. Recognized in a few states, but not valid in most. And the reason for opposing them is the same--people find them sinful or "icky" or both.
Well the reason for opposing them isn't the same. The reason cousins shouldn't get married is for the high rate of genetic defects. There's no biological reason to oppose gay marriage though.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:22 pm to IdahoTiger
quote:
The reason cousins shouldn't get married is for the high rate of genetic defects.
The risk of birth defects is overrated. They published a medical study a few years ago that showed that there was no meaningful increase in the odds of genetic defects unless you had several generations of cousin marriages. (I remember it because message boards in SEC country made a lot of "Good news for Bama fans" jokes.)
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:23 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:This. It's just become a taboo topic.
The risk of birth defects is overrated. They published a medical study a few years ago that showed that there was no meaningful increase in the odds of genetic defects unless you had several generations of cousin marriages. (I remember it because message boards in SEC country made a lot of "Good news for Bama fans" jokes.)
Posted on 5/25/14 at 10:39 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
The risk of birth defects is overrated. They published a medical study a few years ago that showed that there was no meaningful increase in the odds of genetic defects unless you had several generations of cousin marriages. (I remember it because message boards in SEC country made a lot of "Good news for Bama fans" jokes.)
But my point remains, the risks are still there.
Posted on 5/25/14 at 11:47 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
I don't buy that it violates the 14th.
Thanks for the feedback/info. I agree, but I wasn't sure where the initial argument could be found where equal protection applied. Also, sexual orientation still isn't considered a protected class in many states, so it's difficult to apply that portion.
Posted on 5/26/14 at 5:44 am to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
I don't agree with that particular argument because it was always assumed, until about 20 or so years ago, that marriage was a man and a woman. The Constitution has not changed in the interim...public opinion has changed, but that's something that should be reflected through legislators.
So if a certain segment of the population decides to redefine marriage, then the entire population must go along? What is Utah doesn't agree with the new definition of marriage? I agree that it is a state issue.
When are people going to realize the real issue is not about gays getting married - its about destroying religion. After the activist judges have made gay marriage legal in every state, who really thinks the gays are going to just go away?
They are going to directly target churches as "hate groups" for refusing to perform gay marriages. Book it.
Posted on 5/26/14 at 6:15 am to weagle99
Why is it that every few days the homo's are pissed at someone else. Don't they have to work. If they had to work twelve hours orso everyday they wwouldn't have time or energy to get mad at someone.
Posted on 5/26/14 at 7:05 am to bencoleman
quote:Are you suggesting that gays are less likely to work than straight people? Because that would be a monumentally retarded thing to believe.
Why is it that every few days the homo's are pissed at someone else. Don't they have to work. If they had to work twelve hours orso everyday they wwouldn't have time or energy to get mad at someone.
Popular
Back to top



2



