Page 3 of 26 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 254

Thread: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

  1. #21
    Senior Member DarkHeart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Great Lakes, IL
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    "We find these truths to be selfevident.... All men are created equal..."

    I don't think that rings a bell for a lot of people.

    What fallows is a quick lesson (copypasta) from wikipedia on the 14th Amendment to the Constitution:

    The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868 as one of the Reconstruction Amendments.

    Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship that overruled the decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which held that blacks could not be citizens of the United States.

    Its Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without certain steps being taken to ensure fairness. This clause has been used to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, as well as to recognize substantive and procedural rights.

    Its Equal Protection Clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction. This clause was the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court decision which precipitated the dismantling of racial segregation in the United States.

    The amendment also includes a number of clauses dealing with the Confederacy and its officials.
    I think its obvious that anti gay marriage laws are in clear violation of the 14th Amendment. States and the Federal government have deemed it a right to marry, you get tax breaks and other insentives for it. So why deny it to gays? Every court in the last 10 years or so has ruled that denying gays the right to marry serves no purpose to the local and/or federal government.
    HM2


  2. #22
    Senior Member DarkHeart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Great Lakes, IL
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by Pullinteeth View Post
    Isn't it equally cowardly and disgusting to fly the banner of Equal Rights on a crusade for rights that don't fall under that heading? Gay marriage has nothing to do with equal rights. You currently have just as much right to marry a woman as a homosexual man as a heterosexual man does. A homosexual woman has just as much right to marry a man as a heterosexual woman... Or are you claiming they don't?
    What does the sex of the person matter when entering a contract? Gays have no interest in entering into a marriage contract with someone of the opposite sex. Denying them the right to enter into a marriage contract with someone of the same sex serves no rational purpose, and thus the challenge to DOMA.
    HM2


  3. #23
    Senior Member DarkHeart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Great Lakes, IL
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by 29Husker View Post
    ...if it's a "blatant violation of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution" why has the Supreme Court not taken any action.
    The challenges to DOMA are working their way up to the Supreme Court, you know, due process.
    HM2


  4. #24
    Senior Member AJBIGJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    988
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkHeart View Post
    The challenges to DOMA are working their way up to the Supreme Court, you know, due process.
    Oh they very much get saddled with these cases regularly, it's been happening for quite some time now, especially since the 2009 timeframe. My thoughts are repeal that sucker away and leave a basic void of specific language legislation. Just have church A, church B, and courthouse C issued certificates all carry the same weight towards receiving benefits. The Constitutional clause can be weighed against for any specific issues that arise through natural processing in the courts system.
    "The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." ~ Thomas Jefferson

    It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.
    James Madison

  5. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by Pullinteeth View Post
    Isn't it equally cowardly and disgusting to fly the banner of Equal Rights on a crusade for rights that don't fall under that heading? Gay marriage has nothing to do with equal rights. You currently have just as much right to marry a woman as a homosexual man as a heterosexual man does. A homosexual woman has just as much right to marry a man as a heterosexual woman... Or are you claiming they don't?
    There is no mention in the Constitution regarding marriage. However there is the 14th amendment that states: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States". The question is, since homosexual couples cannot in many states recieve the same privileges that heterosexual couples get (Tax breaks, hospital visitation rights reserved for "families", healthcare for spouses), does that mean that their 14th Amendment rights are being violated?

    The argument that a homosexual man has every right to marry a woman is flawed, because the heterosexual man has the right to marry the person he loves. (Though no doubt, someone is going to twist this into a "slippery slope" argument and bring up beastiality and pedophilia)

    The Constitution is a wonderful document, but sometimes people lose track of the fact that it was designed to give people rights, not deny them.

  6. #26
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkHeart View Post
    What does the sex of the person matter when entering a contract? Gays have no interest in entering into a marriage contract with someone of the opposite sex. Denying them the right to enter into a marriage contract with someone of the same sex serves no rational purpose, and thus the challenge to DOMA.
    I am gonna catch hell for this, but I don't care. I know it's not the popular decision, and say what you want, but it's completely unnatural! Whether you are an evolutionist or a creationist or something else, it's simple to see that a man was created/evolved to be with a woman. For any state or federal law to recognize gay marriage as valid is ridiculous. For any state or federal law to allow homosexuals to adopt a child is sickening. If you want to be gay (I know, it's not about want, it's about DNA, whatever) then be gay. You can live your life however you want. But for the "union" to be recognized the same as a traditional marriage by any government makes zero sense. God/nature/evolution etc...did not design us that way.

  7. #27
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by Bosstone View Post
    There is no mention in the Constitution regarding marriage. However there is the 14th amendment that states: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States". The question is, since homosexual couples cannot in many states recieve the same privileges that heterosexual couples get (Tax breaks, hospital visitation rights reserved for "families", healthcare for spouses), does that mean that their 14th Amendment rights are being violated?

    The argument that a homosexual man has every right to marry a woman is flawed, because the heterosexual man has the right to marry the person he loves. (Though no doubt, someone is going to twist this into a "slippery slope" argument and bring up beastiality and pedophilia)

    The Constitution is a wonderful document, but sometimes people lose track of the fact that it was designed to give people rights, not deny them.
    Nobody has the "right" to get married. No state has to recognize any marriage. If it was a right, I wouldn't need a license.

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    I am gonna catch hell for this, but I don't care. I know it's not the popular decision, and say what you want, but it's completely unnatural! Whether you are an evolutionist or a creationist or something else, it's simple to see that a man was created/evolved to be with a woman. For any state or federal law to recognize gay marriage as valid is ridiculous. For any state or federal law to allow homosexuals to adopt a child is sickening. If you want to be gay (I know, it's not about want, it's about DNA, whatever) then be gay. You can live your life however you want. But for the "union" to be recognized the same as a traditional marriage by any government makes zero sense. God/nature/evolution etc...did not design us that way.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosex...ior_in_animals

  9. #29
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by sandsjames View Post
    Nobody has the "right" to get married. No state has to recognize any marriage. If it was a right, I wouldn't need a license.
    The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

    "As Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the majority:
    The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men"

  10. #30
    Banned sandsjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,984
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)

    Re: 20 Judges agree, "there is no valid governmental basis for DOMA."

    Quote Originally Posted by Bosstone View Post
    The Supreme Court disagrees with you.

    "As Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the majority:
    The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men"
    I don't care what was written "for the majority". A right is something that cannot be denied. I can be denied a marriage license. I can have my marriage not be recognized in a different state. I can have a JP, courthouse, church, refuse to perform the ceremony.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •