you've got my vote.Originally Posted by Vteckidd
you've got my vote.
That would be hard currently, since they currently are not state recognized in CA.
But, for the sake of argument, let's say that they get married in Vermont, where gay marriage is legal, and move to GA. They would still be married and still see the same federal benefits; however, if GA chose to not extend state benefits, then they would not receive those. Their choice to be gay, their choice to move to GA. There are consequences for actions, and they are not always positive or negative.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
I'll add to the religion debate about people fearing hell or punishment.
I was raised quite simply. Neither of my parents were very religious, we didn't go to church, I believed in God for one reason or the other, I didn't know details, but believed there was a God, I never feared hell. I was raised to respect people. I have not ONCE feared a decision would send me to hell but rather fear a decision may hurt someone, make me look bad, etc. If I was to go rob someone, I wouldn't fear hell, I'd feel guilty. My parents shared thoughts of heaven, also believed in god in some way shape or form, but I was never told to go to church or read the bible. I decided to start going to church when I was 17, quit going, go randomly now. I don't like a lot of what a modern day large church has to offer.
I think people have morals, non religious based morals. The way some act for example if the bible was proved to be fake, everyone would let out a sigh of relief then start killing and doing whatever they please. I don't see that as the case. The bible doesn't make people nice, fear of punishment doesn't make people nice, people can just be nice. Some may make decisions on religious punishment but I don't see that as holding the world together.
I know MANY who go to church and according to what they believe, sin left and right, then judge others for something else. Many people dislike church goers because of how many can be completely contradicting to their own beliefs.
/Rant. lol
Can you clarify what you mean by this?
This argument being made that not allowing gay couples to marry is some sort of infringement on "civil rights" is preposterous.
Someones SEXUAL PREFERENCE is NOT a civil right. Rosa Parks wasnt refused anything because she was a lesbian, it was because she was BLACK.
If you open the door to sexual preference being a protected RIGHT, then you are opening the door for ANY SEXUAL preference to be a "right".
EX:
"Im a pedophile, I have a RIGHT to sodomize young children, its protected. "
Where do you draw the line?
We can all agree that all races and creeds are created equal. Equality based on race shows no preference. We dont say "well blacks and latino are equal, but Asians, nope, youre 1/2 citizen". We agree all races are equal.
you cannot do that with sexual preference.
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
Ok, so is skin color a right? Do I have a civil right to be black?
Pedophilia, for one isn't necessarily a crime in itself, nor is it bound by the same protections. You still couldn't enter into a legally binding contract with a minor, and even with sex, a minor isn't really a consenting adult.
As a black american, african american, whatever, you as a person have a certain level of civil rights. Marriage and Sexual Preference is not listed in any document as a protected right. until it is, there is no basis for that argument.
Sexual preference is NOT a "right" that gets an protection from any law.
"Congress enacted the Civil Rights Act of 1866. This Act provided that all those born in the United States were citizens of the United States (this provision was meant to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford), and required that "citizens of every race and color ... [have] full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property, as is enjoyed by white citizens."
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
Also, no one is taking away a right to be gay. People of color were having their rights taken away until the 1960s.
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
Marriage is no longer a civil right? When did they reneg on this?
Why don't we listen to what Obama has to say on the matter.
Obama: 'Marriage Is Not A Civil Right' - YouTube
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Good thing he's learned since 2004. Lol
He did also say that he believed being able to transfer property was a civil right, and that it was a civil right to not be discriminated against. At least he was headed in the right direction.
As far as marriage goes, it is very much a civil right and a fundamental right, according to the 14th amendment and the Loving case. With that being said, its about time we ended the discrimination of a class of people entering into binding contracts with the governments based on sexual orientation, something that, like skin color, is not a choice for everyone, or, just not have those contracts or benefits at all
This was after he studied law. Are you saying that he wasn't an expert in 2004? Perhaps he wasn't ready to campaign then to lead the country in 2008?
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
No , marriage is NOT a right. Ive never considered it a right. you dont have the right to marry anything. Even heterosexual couples dont have any "RIGHT" to marriage. Somewhere a long the line, the FEDS and STATES started giving benefits to married couples (traditionally). That should stop.
There are 3 very twisted things going on that people mix together when speaking about gay marriage:
1) Marriage is performed at a religious entity- NOT binding in the eyes of the government
2) Marriage is granted a "license" by various state entities /counties/cities
3) Marriage is subsidized in the form of tax deductions/benefits at the FED level
Eliminate the Feds from being involved with ANYTHING marriage related, let the states decide which marriage they want to recognize, religious instutions can marry whoever they want as a private entity (churches should lose tax exempt status IMO)
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
14th amendment has nothing to do with marriage. Sorry.
Gays can transfer whatever property they want to whoever they want. No one is stopping them.
Gays can go to Vermont to get married, just like you can go to FL to not pay income tax. FEDS have NOTHING to do with marriage. you can choose not to be gay, you cannot choose NOT to be black.
Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
-www.usedbarcode.net
Article 14 of the constitution and Chief Justice Earl Warren would like to have a word with you. Lol
Some can choose not to be gay. Not all
Michael Jackson chose not to be black
What if the country put this much thought, time, and effort into something like say cracking down on abusing the system and what not? Can you imagine?
The Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Property is specifically listed in the EPC, so Obama is correct. Marriage is not listed in the EPC.
If you want to argue that two people who have not in the past been recognized as marriage partners should now be recognized as marriage partners, you must demonstrate that marriage law (not civil rights law) has overlooked or misidentified something that it should not have overlooked or misidentified - namely that marriage was improperly recognized throughout history until now as the bond between a man and woman.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Trust me, they do, but the minority is louder in those cases.
or....... hear me out......
he was a dumb ass then and he is a dumb ass now. The only thing that changed was the person controlling the teleprompter.
Oh its that easy....... so i'm a trip to lowes away from becoming a black man? Will the NAACP send me something in the mail telling me to vote democrat or do you have some type of picnic or initiation?
Loving vs VA was interracial marriage - not same-sex marriage. It was a decision based upon racial discrimination, and as we all know, gay marriage does not have the involvement of race as an element. Big difference.
Justice Warren did proclaim his opinion that he thought that marriage is a civil right - and this comment will be used as a precedent in future discussion. Our current SCOTUS will have to decide if that opinion is correct or not though.
You should read the EPC, as you appear to not have read it.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Come on. Figured you guys were smarter than this...
They decided that anti-miscegenation laws, similar to anti-gay marriage laws, violated that very Equal Protection Clause.
Do you disagree with his assessment?
You can choose your behaviors.
Michael Jackson was still black, no matter how much he bleached.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
I've read it. A million times. How do you feel anti-miscegenation laws are different than anti-gay marriage laws?
Some can choose to not be gay. Not all.
Justice Warren and the rest of the SCOTUS made a unanimous decision based upon RACE, not sexual orientation.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
So what is the difference between race and sexual orientation?
Come on, you can say it. We know.
You cannot change your race. You can choose how to behave. Performing gay acts is an action/behavior. Being black/white is not an action/behavior - it is an immutable state.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
I've told you many times - you are just too dense to understand.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
You can choose who you have relations with, when you have them, and if you have them. They are not something that you do without consciousness.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
You can do better than that.
So in both cases, race and orientation, you admit that it's possible to change your public appearance. I can bleach my skin so people think I'm white, and I can sleep with girls so people think I'm straight.
If sexual orientation is not a behavior that can be controlled, why we do ever let sex offenders of any type out of jail? every sex crime should carry a life sentence or death penalty. If a pedophile likes 5 year old boys, clearly he has no control over that and should be permanently detained.
unless..... what if the pedophiles are born the way they are? then shouldnt we begin recognizing their civil rights as pedophiles rather than trying to rehabilitate them?
It's fact that you cannot argue against. Behaviors cannot be immutable.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Lets not change to out of context illegal behaviors just yet. I'm about to have a breakthrough....
So orientation is a behavior that is a result of a conscious choice, is that what you're getting at?
It doesn't matter how much you bleach your skin, if you are black, you are still black. You cannot choose to be white, and really be white.
Who you choose to sleep with is up to you. Getting married is what is being discussed here. Stay on topic.
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
We decide what is and is not illegal..... maybe we got it wrong with pedophiles... maybe theyre born that way and should have their civil rights recognized.
Posting Permissions
