|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Landmark gay marriage trial starts today in California | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 305 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
I understand what you mean. However, the profession you mentioned is very heavily regulated. And?
Not only that, if you're a public attorney you have to counsel when called upon. And the same should apply to state employees whose business it is to perform marriages, issue licenses, or whatever.
In regard to the business of marriage, remember that we're talking about secular marriage. But so far as I know, there is nothing compelling a Roman Catholic priest (for example) to perform any secular marriages at all, whether for Adam and Eve or Adam and Steve. He is allowed to say that marriage is a religious sacrament of his church and that's that.
But refusing to serve for no reason other than "I don't like them niggers" or "I don't like them fags" is clearly not fashionable. I have no problem with religion becoming unfashionable.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2315 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
onifre writes:
Yes, I agree. I know I've said this before, but in my country the only people who get to legally marry other people are civil servants, priests only get to marry them religiously but are not allowed to do so unless the couple first gets married by law. In fact, that's a felony.
That seems to be the only area where the church has (and rightfully so) jurisdiction. Like when my kids marry their dolls, and I tell them, "Don't marry the black and the white one together," but they do it anyway. My kids, in that ceremony, have the authority. But not state sanctioned marriages, where state law supercedes. Sorry, but their invisible friend doesn't have any say so in those cases. Call you queer and ask you to marry him? Lol
I know I'm sexy as hell, but that would be pushing it.
I know I shouldn't have assumed the boss was a male but it wouldn't have been as funny with a female boss.
Indeed, men are funnier than women.
When I was younger this would have been great. But now that I'm older, I'd hate to be in bars with annoying 18 year old douche bags, and it would certainly be worse if they were 16.
Hmm, if you put it that way... Bring it down to 28, and you've got yourself a deal!
I think the drinking age should be 30 for men, 21 for women.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kjsimons Member Posts: 822 From: Orlando,FL Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Because the pastor went to the state and asked for a license to marry, which means, they should now adhere to the laws of the state. Oni, only this isn't true. States don't license people to perform marriages, it automatically recognises certain people to perform them. Here in Florida, notorary publics, clerk of courts, judges and any certified religious leader (ie pastor, rabbi, etc) can perform marriages. There is no license to perform marriages. Now all civil servants should not discriminate, but if a church doesn't want to marry someone for religious reasons, however bigoted, then that's their right. It's one of the reasons I'm not a religious person is that most religions seem to be more about hating other groups of people than truely helping all people.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Now all civil servants should not discriminate, but if a church doesn't want to marry someone for religious reasons, however bigoted, then that's their right. It's one of the reasons I'm not a religious person is that most religions seem to be more about hating other groups of people than truely helping all people. That pretty much summarizes my understanding of it as well. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 822 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Only protests, though? There are plenty of religious politicians, judges, people in positions of sway, etc. who are fighting this as well through various legal means. Said individuals also have the financial support of churches.
If it were only through protests, it wouldn't be an issue because democracy would reign supreme.....at least one would certainly hope. "A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise A morning filled with 400 billion suns The rising of the milky way" -Carl Sagan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 414 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
hooah212002 writes: There are plenty of religious politicians, judges, people in positions of sway, etc. who are fighting this as well through various legal means. And there are plenty of religious politicians, judges, people in positions of sway, etc. who are supporting the decision as well through various legal means. For example, the just recently elected Reverend Canon of the Los Angeles Diocese of the Episcopal Church, The Rev. Canon Mary D. Glasspool, is an openly gay woman who has been in a committed relationship with her partner for over thirty years. She has a very vested interest in seeing Prop 8 overturned. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Only protests, though? There are plenty of religious politicians, judges, people in positions of sway, etc. who are fighting this as well through various legal means. Said individuals also have the financial support of churches. Lobbying and supporting people financially who agree with your ideologies are not illegal, neither is protesting. And as Jar has stated, it goes both ways. Not everyone who is religious is against gay marriage. It seems you're willing to overlook all the protesting, lobbying, and financial support for things that you personally favor. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 822 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
Lobbying and supporting people financially who agree with your ideologies are not illegal, neither is protesting. Who said anything about the legality of it?
And as Jar has stated, it goes both ways. I never said it did not.
It seems you're willing to overlook all the protesting, lobbying, and financial support for things that you personally favor. I've made no statements about what I favor, now have I? So how would you know? from Message 96quote: hooah212002 writes: But they are the only group who is actively opposing homosexual marriage. They are trying to dictate secular affairs. That was my initial point. Nothing more, nothing less. There really is no reverse situation since there is no proposition to deny anyone religious freedoms (unless you include the christian opposition to the Mosque at ground zero....which of course would do nothing to my point). "A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise A morning filled with 400 billion suns The rising of the milky way" -Carl Sagan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3312 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined:
|
Hyro writes:
I keep seeing this line of thought come up from time to time. And my response is so what? So far, everytime this issue is brought up in a referandum, the populous have always voted against allowing same sex marriage. Stop trying to make it sound like the majority of religious people are tolerant. I know that's not what you're saying, but that's what you're implying. And as Jar has stated, it goes both ways. Not everyone who is religious is against gay marriage. It seems you're willing to overlook all the protesting, lobbying, and financial support for things that you personally favor. Even jar's favorite denomination the episcopal church is about to explode into a bloody civil war over this issue. And it looks like the opposition has the support of the majority within the church. You can't tell me mainstream christianity is tolerant on this issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
onifre Member (Idle past 2971 days) Posts: 4854 From: Dark Side of the Moon Joined: |
Oni, only this isn't true. States don't license people to perform marriages It may not be true for all states but, some states do require it. See here:
quote: In those states where even the clergy must be licensed, the state law should superceds their beliefs.
...but if a church doesn't want to marry someone for religious reasons, however bigoted, then that's their right. We're not talking about marriage ceremonies, we're talking about signing a marriage certificate. If a gay couple approaches a clergy who has been given, by the state, a license to sign their marriage certificate, and they ask him/her to sign their marriage license, then they should have to sign it. Note, they'r not asking them to perform a marriage ceremony for, just sign my paper, as the state has allowed them to do. Their beliefs/bigotry/prejudices should NOT play a factor in that. However, I agree that they should not be forced to perform a marriage ceremony for a gay couple if they don't want to. But sign the paper when asked to? Yes, I believe they should have to. - Oni Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Who said anything about the legality of it? What else were you alluding to, if not the legality of it?
I've made no statements about what I favor, now have I? So how would you know? [quote]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------They don't get to dictate the affairs of secular society, and we shouldn't dictate their affairs.[/qs] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- quote: Let's look at it in context. The poster I responded to wanted to know:
quote: The question is one of legality. You challenged that point, and I responded that protesting is not illegal.
There really is no reverse situation since there is no proposition to deny anyone religious freedoms (unless you include the christian opposition to the Mosque at ground zero....which of course would do nothing to my point). Forcing pastors to do things against their religion under their own sanctuary would be violating their civil rights. So, my point still stands, not that it matters since pastors since the law recognizes that pastors do not have to perform marriages that go against their religion. Apparently some people think 2 wrongs equal a right. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 822 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
What else were you alluding to, if not the legality of it? I meant that I never said any of the actions I mentioned were illegal. I never said that contributing funds or protesting or anything we've discussed is illegal. YOU said all they do is protest. I said they do more than just protest. That is ALL I was getting at. Now you've went and made a big hullaballoo about it all.
The question is one of legality. Who was I responding to: you? or the person you were responding to? Did I say protesting was illegal? Or did I simply say that they did more than protest? Stop making something more out of what I am saying. "A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise A morning filled with 400 billion suns The rising of the milky way" -Carl Sagan
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1275 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
Judge Walker has refused to stay the effect of his ruling during appeal, but will maintain the temporary stay currently in effect until August 18 to give proponents of the ban an opportunity to apply for a stay from the Court of Appeals. Story here.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1275 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
I have now seen a copy of the Order that Judge Walker issued denying Proponents' request for a stay of his ruling declaring Proposition 8 unconstitutional. In that Order, one of the reasons Judge Walker cites for refusing to continue the stay is that Proponents have failed to show that they have the right to appeal the ruling.
One of the key requirements to any federal lawsuit is called "standing." Basically, that means that a person must show that the action they are objecting to harms them in some way. Before Proponents can appeal, they have to establish that they have standing to appeal. (At this point in time, I am assuming that the State will not appeal. Because the Governator and the Attorney General both realigned at trial to side with the Plaintiffs, this seems a safe assumption.) Judge Walker concluded that it's unlikely that Proponents will be able to establish standing. If they in fact cannot, and I think that Judge Walker is correct, they will not be able to appeal, and Judge Walker's Order will not be overturned. This means that Proposition 8 will be dead, gay marriage will be allowed in California, but there will be no federal precedent binding on any other jurisdictions. Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is the mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus. -- Thomas Jefferson For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and non-believers. -- Barack Obama We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 822 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
I just read that marriages will be allowed at 5pm, Aug 18th.
"A still more glorious dawn awaits
Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise A morning filled with 400 billion suns The rising of the milky way" -Carl Sagan
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024