Page 17 of 20 FirstFirst ... 7121314151617181920 LastLast
Results 321 to 340 of 398
  1. #321  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    The bottom line is, there is an effort afoot to establish a new legal class that certifies homosexual relations, and likens it to marriage.
    Its not just about marriage. There's an effort afoot to establish a precedence to link sexual orientation under Title VII and establish the GLBT community as a protected class.
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #322  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    The fact that this thread has gone on this long is simply proof that Rove knows his hot-button issues.
    bah. I've played into his hands again. Rove and Haliburton own us all.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. #323  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    I will try this once more. This is about gay marriage. It is currently illegal, that is, gays are denied the right to marry one another. How is that *not* discriminatory?
    Well, we agree that is discriminatory. But we haven't determined if it unconstitutionally so?

    On what basis do you assert that "gays" have a "rightto marry one another?"
  4. #324  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Polygamy has nothing to do with homosexuality. That is a false argument. You can't defend one against the other.
    Actually, since protected classes don't include sexual orientation but do include religion as a determining factor, polygamist have an even better argument than homosexuals.
  5. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #325  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    Its not just about marriage. There's an effort afoot to establish a precedence to link sexual orientation under Title VII and establish the GLBT community as a protected class.
    What exactly is a protected class?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #326  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Well, we agree that is discriminatory. But we haven't determined if it unconstitutionally so?

    On what basis do you assert that "gays" have a "rightto marry one another?"
    Where does it define in the Constitution what's ok to discriminate against? Back to the majority rules thing?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. #327  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    What exactly is a protected class?
    http://www.hr-guide.com/data/G714.htm
  8. #328  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    bah. I've played into his hands again. Rove and Haliburton own us all.
    You don't think Rove suggested that this topic be re-introduced after the president's historically low approval rating, and the off term election approaching?
  9. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #329  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    Thanks for that. So, thats your concern, and you're ok with gay marraige?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  10. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #330  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    You don't think Rove suggested that this topic be re-introduced after the president's historically low approval rating, and the off term election approaching?
    I honestly and completely don't care
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  11. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #331  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    What have they voted on?
    Several states have put same sex marriage on the ballot and it has failed.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  12. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #332  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Most people, when discussing sexual orientation, are refering to whether one prefers same sex or opposite sex relations. I don't have statistics, but my assumption is that 100% of the polygamists in the US are heterosexual.
    Pretty broad generalozations on your part. Sexual orientation could be same sex, multiple partners at same time, multiple partners on a rotational basis, man-boy love alliance (or whatever they call it), beastiality, transexual, on and on. Why would you assume all polygamist are hetrosexual?
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  13. #333  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Several states have put same sex marriage on the ballot and it has failed.
    Again you miss the point, it is not up to the majority to protect these rights/privelages. It is up to the judiciary.
  14. #334  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Thanks for that. So, thats your concern, and you're ok with gay marraige?
    No, I'm not. But if a state approves it by popular vote with a measure that passes Constitutional muster then what can I do?
  15. #335  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    No, I'm not. But if a state approves it by popular vote with a measure that passes Constitutional muster then what can I do?
    You do realize that a majority does not need to approve a minority being provided equal rights under the law?
  16. #336  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    You do realize that a majority does not need to approve a minority being provided equal rights under the law?
    Which is exactly what happened in 1967 when the supreme court ruled that blacks could marry whites.
  17. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #337  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    No, I'm not. But if a state approves it by popular vote with a measure that passes Constitutional muster then what can I do?
    Amend the US Constitution
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #338  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Pretty broad generalozations on your part. Sexual orientation could be same sex, multiple partners at same time, multiple partners on a rotational basis, man-boy love alliance (or whatever they call it), beastiality, transexual, on and on. Why would you assume all polygamist are hetrosexual?
    You forgot sex with insects... insex I think. None of these have anything to do with gay marraige.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. #339  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    No, I'm not. But if a state approves it by popular vote with a measure that passes Constitutional muster then what can I do?
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael
    Amend the US Constitution
    Except they would have to either

    1.) find a way to amend the constitution "higher than" the equal protection clause OR

    2.) stack the supreme court with ideologs
  20. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #340  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Why would you assume all polygamist are hetrosexual?
    Sorry. Missed that last question. Only hetrosexuals get married, right? Do the math
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.

Posting Permissions