Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Church and Homosexual Marriage
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 63 (189461)
03-01-2005 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Vercingetorix
03-01-2005 11:59 AM


Re: Democracy Rules?
if a particular state wanted to do this, and they had the majority's support, well then why not?
Mainly because of the fourteenth amendment. By being a citizen of the United States, you are entiteld to equal protection under the law. In other words, no level of government can treat you any differently than it does any other citizen. Not at state level, not at federal level. It works under a pretty basic premise... it doesn't matter if the Governor or the President signs the piece of paper to bully a minority, it's crap either way.
this is definately a gray issue its not black and white.
Funny choice of words. Look at the case Loving v. Virginia, in which it was ruled as absolute horseshit that the state of Virginia could choose to not recognize inter-racial marriages, or otherwise penalize people for having them. This was all hashed out a very long time ago. It's just a different group getting screwed.
A right is exactly that... a right. You can't get together and decide it doesn't apply to some people. And marriage was in no uncertain terms defined as a "fundamental right" in that same case.

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-01-2005 11:59 AM Vercingetorix has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-01-2005 2:23 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 63 (189466)
03-01-2005 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by Vercingetorix
03-01-2005 11:59 AM


Re: Democracy Rules?
if you do not live in Missouri what business of this is yours? or mine?
I might add... if the state of Missouri can decide that homosexuals are less than equal humans, then the state of Illinois can decide that heterosexuals are less than equal humans. So yes, it is very much my business.

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-01-2005 11:59 AM Vercingetorix has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-01-2005 2:15 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 30 of 63 (189491)
03-01-2005 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by Vercingetorix
03-01-2005 2:23 PM


Re: Democracy Rules?
yeeeaahhhh rrriiight! that's gonna happen good rebuttle.
Slot in whatever group pleases you in the place of "heterosexual". The state of Illinois would have precedent to decide that Jews are less than equal humans, for instance. (Which you may have noticed happens from time to time on this crazy ol' planet of ours.)
I'm constantly amazed by people who don't get the basic premise that legal prejudice against one group opens the door for legal prejudice against anyone.
do you really believe that?
That the fourteenth amendment guarantees equal protection? There's no "believing it" or not.
quote:
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.
If you feel that certain practices like affirmative action violate that, then go ahead and start a topic on the subject. But the language of the amendment is clear. "Nor shall any state... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
So basically, the state does not have the ability to fuck over a subset of the population, no matter what the group consensus is.
Free tip, sport... get a basic understanding of civil rights law under your belt before trying to argue civil rights. The Constitution is a good place to start.
that is for citizens, no one answered the question above if the arabic peoples in question were citizens or not, if they were they would be called americans so i am guess they are not, and therefore not coverd by that amendment.
No, non-citizens are not protected by the fourteenth amendment. Non-citizens are also not married by the United States Government. So what's your point?

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-01-2005 2:23 PM Vercingetorix has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by joz, posted 03-18-2005 3:09 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 63 (189607)
03-02-2005 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Vercingetorix
03-01-2005 6:36 PM


Re: Democracy Rules?
if the majority of a states citizen's are against it and the federal government enforces it any way because. then that is tyrrany and its time for action.
Then mobilize the people against the fourteenth amendment. You seem to have a big problem with this whole "everyone in the country will be treated equally" thing; take action!

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-01-2005 6:36 PM Vercingetorix has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-02-2005 9:20 AM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 63 (189612)
03-02-2005 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by Vercingetorix
03-02-2005 9:20 AM


Re: Democracy Rules?
proabably because not everyone is and it is an oxymoron that everyone will be.
Okay, you do know what "oxymoron" means, right? I ask because to use it in this context is kind of a verbal abortion.
Regardless, you still haven't explained your problem with following the Constitution. The fact that, in your view, it's violated in certain areas doesn't mean it doesn't apply when a specific matter is taken to the courts.

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-02-2005 9:20 AM Vercingetorix has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-02-2005 9:35 AM Dan Carroll has not replied
 Message 43 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-02-2005 9:41 AM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 63 (189626)
03-02-2005 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by Vercingetorix
03-02-2005 9:41 AM


Re: Democracy Rules?
i just think that the constitution more of an ideal than a legal document.
Okay, that's your first problem, then. The Constitution is not only a legal document, it is the final arbiter in all legal decisions.
You might want to think of it another way, but... well, sorry. It's just not the case.
it is sorta becoming a joke. i hear people talk about the bill of rights yet those amedments have been butchered recently and no longer hold the weight that they once did.
How do you figure?
i have no problem following the constitution, its just that i don't believe it is being followed.
Then why are you advocating a gross violation of the Constitution, in reccomending that certain states be allowed to forbid same-sex marriage?

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by Vercingetorix, posted 03-02-2005 9:41 AM Vercingetorix has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 63 (189676)
03-02-2005 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by berberry
03-02-2005 3:23 PM


That's gotta be a record...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by berberry, posted 03-02-2005 3:23 PM berberry has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Angeldust, posted 03-02-2005 3:51 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 63 (189756)
03-03-2005 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Angeldust
03-02-2005 3:51 PM


Re: That's gotta be a record...
I think that's the meanest thing I've ever posted here.
Damn, you have a way lower threshhold for meanness than I do.

"Creationists make it sound as though a theory is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night."
-Isaac Asimov

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Angeldust, posted 03-02-2005 3:51 PM Angeldust has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 63 (193655)
03-23-2005 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by joz
03-18-2005 3:09 PM


Re: Democracy Rules?
The whole basis for my legal residence in this country AS A NON CITIZEN is my marriage by a justice of the peace to a US citizen right here in the US....
Yeah, thanks for the heads up. That explains why my Dad became a citizen when he married my Mom.
I thought it would be obvious that I was talking about two non-citizens. My bad.
So hah Mr smarty pants...
My pants never had any of yer fancy book-learnin'. They were educated on the streets.

"You can't expect him to be answering your prayers when he's not real, can you? That's like writing to the characters of a soap opera and expecting a reply, Mr. Silly Sausage!"
-Jane Christie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by joz, posted 03-18-2005 3:09 PM joz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Phat, posted 03-23-2005 10:21 AM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 63 (193663)
03-23-2005 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Phat
03-23-2005 10:21 AM


Re: Mr. Smarty Pants meets Mr. Silly Sausage
And who is Jane Christie, anyway?
A character from Coupling (the good, British version) which, if you've never seen it, you must run out and watch immediately.
And did your pants attend the school of hard knocks?
No, I prefer soft knocks on my pants.

"You can't expect him to be answering your prayers when he's not real, can you? That's like writing to the characters of a soap opera and expecting a reply, Mr. Silly Sausage!"
-Jane Christie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Phat, posted 03-23-2005 10:21 AM Phat 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