Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   About prop 8 and other anti gay rights props
rueh
Member (Idle past 3691 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 38 of 192 (489556)
11-28-2008 7:54 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Minnemooseus
11-28-2008 1:14 AM


Re: Get the government out of the marriage business
While I do agree that anything that gets the government out of our lives is a good thing, are you suggesting that only couples that are involved in a particular religion gets to hold the tittle of "married"? What about those who do not attend any type of religious organization? Do those people only get civil unions as well? Wouldn't this continue this trend of bestowing rights and tittles to some groups while denying it to others?
Edited by rueh, : Haven't had my coffee yet.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Minnemooseus, posted 11-28-2008 1:14 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Huntard, posted 11-28-2008 8:23 AM rueh has replied
 Message 43 by NosyNed, posted 11-28-2008 9:42 AM rueh has replied

rueh
Member (Idle past 3691 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 40 of 192 (489559)
11-28-2008 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Huntard
11-28-2008 8:23 AM


Re: Get the government out of the marriage business
Well what I worry about, is that it gives precedence for further laws to be enacted that would establish seperate rights to each group. No matter how well we try to make the two designations equal. We would eventualy see one group or the other petioning for certain rights that would be excluded from the other. I know this is all hypothetical so really it has no legs for argument, I just feel that eventually you will have one group not wanting to acknowledge the rights of the other. I don't think this requires to much of a stretch of the imagination, since we already see this occuring to the homosexual community.

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Huntard, posted 11-28-2008 8:23 AM Huntard has not replied

rueh
Member (Idle past 3691 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 45 of 192 (489572)
11-28-2008 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by NosyNed
11-28-2008 9:42 AM


Re: Only some?
NN writes:
If a government(s) went to the huge hassle of rewriting all laws to avoid using the word "marriage" it wouldn't help the anti-gays a tiny little bit.
Well after working for the government for the past 10 years I can honestly say. They have no problem throwing a ton of money to correct the most minor of things. I don't see how this is any different than other ridiculous projects the government has spent millions on.
However I agree that in your proposal the term marriage, if allowed to be bestowed without legal rights by organizations, does degrade the meaning of the word.
As a side note, from someone who has been married I think we should allow homosexuals to marry. That way everyone can be just as unhappy as everyone else

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by NosyNed, posted 11-28-2008 9:42 AM NosyNed has not replied

rueh
Member (Idle past 3691 days)
Posts: 382
From: universal city tx
Joined: 03-03-2008


Message 119 of 192 (490129)
12-02-2008 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by FliesOnly
12-02-2008 3:23 PM


Re: Minority opinion rules?
Hello flies only
Would California's ratifying of prop 8 count as due process? In section 1 of article 14 it states
article 14 writes:
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law
So is the ammendment part of said due process? Or is it specifically referring to the judicial system?

'Qui non intelligit, aut taceat, aut discat'
The mind is like a parachute. It only works when it is open.-FZ
The industrial revolution, flipped a bitch on evolution.-NOFX

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by FliesOnly, posted 12-02-2008 3:23 PM FliesOnly has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by subbie, posted 12-02-2008 3:43 PM rueh has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024