Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789101112 LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 221
  1. #181  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    I think that's right in line with one man and one woman failure stats.
    I think the "it" that he was actually referring to was the failure rate for one man / one woman marriages.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  2. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #182  
    Ah, right. Ditto then.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  3. #183  
    Quote Originally Posted by wjclint View Post
    Is the regulation of marriage, so that you can not be the same sex and be married, the type of regulation that should be allowed (like you can't, generally, marry your cousin) or is it the type of regulation that should not be allowed (like you can't marry someone whose skin color is too different from yours).
    So you're specifically referring to regulation by the States as opposed to the Federal Gov't? The Federal Gov't has NO provisions to regulate marriage. The States may, but I think even that's tenuous at best. And, unless I'm far afield, the Federal Gov't has no choice but to respect a State-sanctioned marriage.

    I'm not terribly interested in exploring the constitutionality of each of the benefits/obligations; suffice it to say I think some overstep the bounds established in the Constitution (social security, for example) while others refer to private corporations (who can do what they want, so far as they don't infringe the rights of others).

    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    It's a wee bit more involved than that. Marriage is a legal contract. If it was only about taxation, then you'd think the gov would welcome polygamy... mo-money! mo-money! mo-money!
    That's a problem. The vows can hardly be legally binding, otherwise breach of contract occurs the first time my wife doesn't bring me a beer when I tell her to.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  4. wjclint's Avatar
    Posts
    40 Posts
    Global Posts
    41 Global Posts
    #184  
    Quote Originally Posted by ****-richardson View Post
    So you're specifically referring to regulation by the States as opposed to the Federal Gov't? The Federal Gov't has NO provisions to regulate marriage. The States may, but I think even that's tenuous at best. And, unless I'm far afield, the Federal Gov't has no choice but to respect a State-sanctioned marriage.

    I'm not terribly interested in exploring the constitutionality of each of the benefits/obligations; suffice it to say I think some overstep the bounds established in the Constitution (social security, for example) while others refer to private corporations (who can do what they want, so far as they don't infringe the rights of others).



    That's a problem. The vows can hardly be legally binding, otherwise breach of contract occurs the first time my wife doesn't bring me a beer when I tell her to.
    To answer your questions: No I am not referring only to State laws as at least two the the examples I gave (taxes and Social Security) are Federal Law. Currently the Federal Government recognizes marriages recognized by the States, but could pass something like the DOMA which would change things.

    The marriage contract is not like a contract between two large companies that is 100 pages long with multiple footnotes. It is a type of contract that is recognized and legally enforceable in certain ways. The fact that part of your vows, or even agreements you reach with your spouse during your marriage, will not be enforced by the Courts does not mean it isn't a contract or isn't enforceable.

    Now, back to the question that no one seems willing to answer: What is a rational reason to deny the benefits and obligations of marriage to two men or two women who want them, other than to just say "it's tradition" or "because marriage is between one man and one woman"?
    Phone History: VisorPhone --> Treo180 --> Treo650--> Treo700p--> PalmCentro --> HTCTouchDiamond (2weeks) --> PalmCentro --> Palm Pre
  5. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #185  
    Quote Originally Posted by ****-richardson View Post
    That's a problem. The vows can hardly be legally binding, otherwise breach of contract occurs the first time my wife doesn't bring me a beer when I tell her to.
    The vows are indeed legally binding, and you're right, it's State dependant, not Federal. Adultery is an example of breaching the 'vows' contract, and is punishable in some states. Wikipedia is my friend: "In the United States, laws vary from state to state. In those States where adultery is still on the statute books, even though they are rarely prosecuted, the penalties vary from life sentence (Michigan), a fine of $10 in (Maryland), or a Class I felony in (Wisconsin). In the U.S. Military, adultery is a potential court-martial offense. The enforceability of adultery laws in the United States has been / is being questioned following Supreme Court decisions since 1965 relating to privacy and sexual intimacy of consenting adults, in cases such as Lawrence v. Texas."

    BTW, did you guys catch Cheney last night on Fox news? He admitted that he'd vote in support of Gay Marriage. He thinks it should be decided state by state, not federal.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  6. #186  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    ...BTW, did you guys catch Cheney last night on Fox news? He admitted that he'd vote in support of Gay Marriage. He thinks it should be decided state by state, not federal.
    I didn't see it, but isn't his daughter gay?
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  7. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #187  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    I didn't see it, but isn't his daughter gay?
    Yes, Mary Cheney is. He spoke about how she had a long term relationship that he completely supported. Liz Cheney is the daughter thats on the tv channels alot. For the longest time, I thought Liz was the lez!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  8. #188  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    BTW, did you guys catch Cheney last night on Fox news?
    I never watch Fox News, so that would be unlikely. Although I find their coverage more overtly slanted than it used to be, I tend to watch MSNBC for national news (or more usually political coverage).
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  9. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #189  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    I never watch Fox News, so that would be unlikely. Although I find their coverage more overtly slanted than it used to be, I tend to watch MSNBC for national news (or more usually political coverage).
    Can you offer up an overtly slanted example? I'm assuming you mean right-wing bias.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  10. #190  
    MSNBC? You shock me with that statement.
  11. #191  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Can you offer up an overtly slanted example? I'm assuming you mean right-wing bias.
    Reread it.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  12. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #192  

    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Reread it.
    Got me. My bad. I made the assumption that you didn't watch Fox because of perceived right wing bias. I knee jerked again! (slaps knee angerly)
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  13. #193  
    Actually this country WAS founded upon Judeo/Christian priniciples and beliefs. There is no doubt about that (I am not a religious person in any way whatsoever).
    Separation of church and state is NOT mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. Do I belive that the a "church" should be making decisions? Absolutely not. What our Founding Fathers wanted to prevent was that exact thing happening which is why the Constitution is written as it is. Most people have never even read it and really have no idea what this very important document even says. They just regurgetate what they hear from their favorite news source.
    And in answer to the question, I do not support gays getting married.
  14. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #194  
    Quote Originally Posted by JonR88 View Post
    And in answer to the question, I do not support gays getting married.
    What gives or who gave you the right to decide?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  15. wjclint's Avatar
    Posts
    40 Posts
    Global Posts
    41 Global Posts
    #195  
    Quote Originally Posted by JonR88 View Post
    Actually this country WAS founded upon Judeo/Christian priniciples and beliefs. There is no doubt about that (I am not a religious person in any way whatsoever).
    Separation of church and state is NOT mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. Do I belive that the a "church" should be making decisions? Absolutely not. What our Founding Fathers wanted to prevent was that exact thing happening which is why the Constitution is written as it is. Most people have never even read it and really have no idea what this very important document even says. They just regurgetate what they hear from their favorite news source.
    And in answer to the question, I do not support gays getting married.
    That's nice that you feel that way. Now give us some reasons for your feelings. Just saying it doesn't make it so.

    Our country was founded on, for example, a) Federalism, b) a three branch government; c) a right to free speech; d) a right to habeus corpus; e) guarantee of a republican form of government; f) checks and balances between the three branches of government; g) the right to trial by jury; h) the prohibition against ex post facto laws; i) the other stuff in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

    These are the things, and the only things, the Delegates agreed upon and the States voted upon when the Constitution was adopted as the founding document of the United States of America. They didn't vote on whether they agreed to Christianity, or not (although that would have been entertaining).

    So, since you are saying our Country was founded on Judeo Christian principles my question is where do you find any of the examples I give as the founding principles of this Nation as being Judeo Christian principles? And vague analogies like "Isaiah 33:22 is kinda like three branches of government" don't count.
    Phone History: VisorPhone --> Treo180 --> Treo650--> Treo700p--> PalmCentro --> HTCTouchDiamond (2weeks) --> PalmCentro --> Palm Pre
  16. #196  
    WJ, you are a minority then. Next you will be backing Barry and his statement that the U.S. was one of the largest Muslim countries: Obama Says U.S. Could Be Seen as a Muslim Country, Too - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com.

    Incidentally, we are the largest Jewish nation and I think that is just great and dandy.
  17. wjclint's Avatar
    Posts
    40 Posts
    Global Posts
    41 Global Posts
    #197  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    WJ, you are a minority then. Next you will be backing Barry and his statement that the U.S. was one of the largest Muslim countries: Obama Says U.S. Could Be Seen as a Muslim Country, Too - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com.

    Incidentally, we are the largest Jewish nation and I think that is just great and dandy.
    Eratosthenes was in the minority to, but he was still right (not comparing myself to Eratosthenes, just saying the fact that a bunch of people thought he was wrong didn't make him wrong). And, as has already been stated in this thread - bunch of Christians being around in 1787 does not equal this nation was founded on Christianity.

    So, since you are the one that has asserted that this Nation was founded on Judeo Christian principles where is your historical evidence? In the last post I mentioned a bunch of our Nation's founding principles. To make it easier let's limit it to one: Where is your historical evidence that trial by jury (one of the founding principles of this Nation) is based in Judeo Christian principles? A group of people stoning someone doesn't count as the type of jury mentioned in our Constitution . . . usually.
    Phone History: VisorPhone --> Treo180 --> Treo650--> Treo700p--> PalmCentro --> HTCTouchDiamond (2weeks) --> PalmCentro --> Palm Pre
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #198  
    Maybe you guys don't mean in the literal sense, when you say the US was founded on Judeo-Christian principles.

    I can go along with the idea that the vast majority of people in the US are, and have been since it's founding, Judeo-Christian. And I can then go along with the notion that lawmakers and judges have let their core beliefs influence their legislative and judicial actions.

    You can see it clearly in many of our laws. This doesn't, however, make the idea that we draft laws based on our religious convictions, a good thing. And WJ is correct. The thread of religion that runs through our currency, doctrines, government buildings, etc... none of these are based on our founding documents; the Constitution, etc.

    Religious ideals are part of the fabric of our culture by virtue of the convictions of the people that influence our culture. These ideals are not necessarily good (disregarding the obvious universal ideals like killing is bad, stealing is a no-no, etc. - these are common sense ideals, not religious). The notion that Gays are sinners and therefore to be shunned and restricted from participating in the social and economic boons that legal marriage affords, is rooted in religious ideology (mythology imho), and has no place in government law.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. #199  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Ok, this one has bugged me for a long long time. Are we a Christian nation, or aren't we? If we aren't, doesn't that blast holes on many of the moral issues we stand on like abortion, gay marriage, bigomy, and prostitution? What do we use as a moral compass, if not an ideological one?
    Go ahead and talk amongst yourselves.
    What does Christian nation mean? The principle founders were mostly Masons and general deists. Many of them if they were in the world of science today would likely be athiests.

    Ther eis nothing "Judeo-Christian" in the political theory expressed or expounded by the founders. What informed them were Greco-Roman views. Our political culture comes from Greece and (pre-Christian) Rome.

    Now let's talk about Christianity and your mention of abortion, gay marriage, bigamy and prostitution: Where are those addressed in the Christian New Testament? The Christian New Testament doesn't address those issues. And it is exceptionally clear that the founders of Christianity and Church fathers very often believed that many of the Old Testament rules were no longer applicable.

    That is a good thing in many respects because although the Old Testiment is opposed to homosexuality, the Old Testament also glorifies genocide, the murder of innocent women and children, war for lebensraum, state and religious murder of those exercising free speech, and of course legalizes slavery.
  20. #200  
    Quote Originally Posted by JonR88 View Post
    Actually this country WAS founded upon Judeo/Christian priniciples and beliefs. There is no doubt about that (I am not a religious person in any way whatsoever). .
    Seriously, you fail history 101.

    The US was founded on democratic and republic ideals created and exercised by pagans and atheists in ancient Greece and Rome
Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions