KillerMovies - Movies That Matter!

REGISTER HERE TO JOIN IN! - It's easy and it's free!
Home » Community » General Discussion Forum » Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage
Started by: Robtard

Forum Jump:
Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (2): [1] 2 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread
Robtard
Senor Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location: Captain's Chair, CA

Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

The U.S. Supreme Court stepped into the gay marriage debate for the first time on Friday by agreeing to review two challenges to federal and state laws that define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

The high court agreed to review a case against a federal law that denies married same-sex couples the federal benefits heterosexual couples receive. It also unexpectedly took up a challenge to California's ban on gay marriage, known as Proposition 8, which voters narrowly approved in 2008.

Same-sex marriage is a politically charged issue in a country where 31 of the 50 states have passed constitutional amendments banning it, while Washington, D.C., and nine states have legalized it, three of them on Election Day last month. -end snip


http://www.reuters.com/article/2012...E8B617420121209


If/When the Supreme Court rules that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, it's going to be lolz from the Right/Religious Right crying over how the government is too big and has no right encroaching on peoples rights/beliefs/Teling them what they can or can't do. Can't wait for this circus to get full under way.


__________________


You've Just Been Kirked To The Curb

Last edited by Robtard on Dec 9th, 2012 at 07:08 AM

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 07:02 AM
Robtard is currently offline Click here to Send Robtard a Private Message Find more posts by Robtard Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

Re: Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Robtard
It also unexpectedly took up a challenge to California's ban on gay marriage, known as Proposition 8, which voters narrowly approved in 2008.


I guess 52 to 47 is narrow but the map made me think, otherwise.

(please log in to view the image)

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Robtard
If/When the Supreme Court rules that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional, it's going to be lolz from the Right/Religious Right crying over how the government is too big and has no right encroaching on peoples rights/beliefs. Can't wait for this circus to get full under way.


And I would agree with that crying. The problem is the laws favor heterosexual couples over the single people and whatever-sexual people are not heterosexual people, and they shouldn't. As always, sound-minded adults should be free to associate with each however they want.


__________________

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 07:08 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Robtard
Senor Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location: Captain's Chair, CA

Re: Re: Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

You agree that they'll be much crying, or you think those that will be crying have a rightful place to cry?


__________________


You've Just Been Kirked To The Curb

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 07:11 AM
Robtard is currently offline Click here to Send Robtard a Private Message Find more posts by Robtard Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

Re: Re: Re: Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Robtard
You agree that they'll be much crying, or you think those that will be crying have a rightful place to cry?


Yes to both...sort of.

More like there should be crying because the government should have never gotten between people* to freely-associate with each other. It is just more governing that should not have been put there in the first place. We need more AC on these boards: he explained, much better than I, why marriage is archaic and unnecessary.


*Defined what I meant by that, already.


__________________

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 07:15 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Robtard
Senor Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location: Captain's Chair, CA

Re: Re: Re: Re: Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

quote: (post)
Originally posted by dadudemon
Yes to both...sort of.

More like there should be crying because the government should have never gotten between people* to freely-associate with each other. It is just more governing that should not have been put there in the first place. We need more AC on these boards: he explained, much better than I, why marriage is archaic and unnecessary.


*Defined what I meant by that, already.


Well, yes, the DoMA should have never passed, but it did, so we need more government to step in and abolish it, thereby giving every consenting adult the same right of being able to marry who they choose, should they choose to marry.

I'll find it lolz when the Right starts crying over "big gob'ment!", when the DoMA is/was just that and they're the ones who typically claim to want less government.

Saying "marriage is archaic" is just something "edgy" people like to say to make themselves seem edgier. Like yelling "**** the system", then they go drink their $5.75 designer coffee drink, while wearing skinny jeans and using their MacBooks at Starbucks.


__________________


You've Just Been Kirked To The Curb

Last edited by Robtard on Dec 9th, 2012 at 07:30 AM

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 07:25 AM
Robtard is currently offline Click here to Send Robtard a Private Message Find more posts by Robtard Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Robtard
Well, yes, the DoMA should have never passed, but it did, so we need more government to step in and abolish it, thereby giving every consenting adult the same right of being able to marry who they choose, should they choose to marry.



The only reason they want those rights is due to the privileges that the married enjoy. The rights should not be dependent upon marriage.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Robtard
Saying "marriage is archaic" is just something "edgy" people like to say to make themselves seem edgier.


Yeah, saying marriage is outdated is definitely "edgy". Derp.

Saying legal marriage is necessary is something the right says to justify their derpy hate to the "homos".

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Robtard
Like yelling "**** the system", then they go drink their $5.75 designer coffee drink, while wearing skinny jeans and using their MacBooks at Starbucks.


I don't drink coffee, can't fit into designer skinny jeans, don't ever shop at Starbucks, and have never owned an Apple computer. Who can afford all that shit, anyway? lol


__________________

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 08:15 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Robtard
Senor Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location: Captain's Chair, CA

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

quote: (post)
Originally posted by dadudemon
The only reason they want those rights is due to the privileges that the married enjoy. The rights should not be dependent upon marriage.

Yeah, saying marriage is outdated is definitely "edgy". Derp.

Saying legal marriage is necessary is something the right says to justify their derpy hate to the "homos".

I don't drink coffee, can't fit into designer skinny jeans, don't ever shop at Starbucks, and have never owned an Apple computer. Who can afford all that shit, anyway? lol


Probably. But maybe some just like the title. Also, marriage doesn't always grant better privileges, eg we pay slightly higher taxes filing together in CA in our bracket. But that aside, I'm not against non married people having any of the same privileges/penalties.

Yup, it is. Glad you agree.

And that doesn't follow logic either. "Legal marriage" can be homo and legal.

I wasn't implying you think you're edgy.


__________________


You've Just Been Kirked To The Curb

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 08:20 AM
Robtard is currently offline Click here to Send Robtard a Private Message Find more posts by Robtard Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Robtard
And that doesn't follow logic either. "Legal marriage" can be homo and legal.

I wasn't implying you think you're edgy.


In CA, legal marriage is between one man and one woman. Prop 8 is from CA, as well. I was not aware we were talking about the other states where it is grayly legal.

Suuuuuure.


__________________

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 08:36 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Ascendancy
Senior Member

Gender:
Location: Amerika

Again, just make them feel like lesser people and arrest those who associate with them and "facilitate" their homosexuality as they're going to do in Uganda. Let us all leap and frolic upon the happy middle ground.

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 04:34 PM
Ascendancy is currently offline Click here to Send Ascendancy a Private Message Find more posts by Ascendancy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Symmetric Chaos
Fractal King

Gender: Male
Location: Ko-ro-ba

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

quote: (post)
Originally posted by dadudemon
The only reason they want those rights is due to the privileges that the married enjoy.


The symbolic victory means quite a lot actually.

However speaking about "rights" and "privileges" is a bit strange here. The rights are the privileges. The only reason they want those rights is because they want to have those rights.


__________________



Graffiti outside Latin class.
Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
A juvenal prank.

Old Post Dec 9th, 2012 05:04 PM
Symmetric Chaos is currently offline Click here to Send Symmetric Chaos a Private Message Find more posts by Symmetric Chaos Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Ascendancy
Senior Member

Gender:
Location: Amerika

So if this by some chance goes badly for those wanting marriage for all, what happens to all the same-sex marriages performed thus far? Would that simply mean that companies don't have to acknowledge them when analyzing benefits for their employees and their significant others if they aren't of the opposite sex?

Old Post Dec 10th, 2012 12:00 AM
Ascendancy is currently offline Click here to Send Ascendancy a Private Message Find more posts by Ascendancy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The symbolic victory means quite a lot actually.

However speaking about "rights" and "privileges" is a bit strange here. The rights are the privileges. The only reason they want those rights is because they want to have those rights.


Makes perfect sense and I do not disagree. We (not really us...but you know what I mean) created a privileged group of people and this has made it unfair to same-sex couples (or even for polygamous or polyandrous relationships). We should be able to just enter into a civil contract with each other, regardless of the idea of "marriage". This would mean "marriage" rights could be extended to best friends that want to share financial and legal responsibility with each other.

I think the real problem is American's inability to let go of Victorian morals. We just can't separate sex from anything. "I don't care about Estate, tax, insurance, medical, family, consumer, death, and employment benefits! They are having man on man BUTTsex in their America! This will NOT stand!"

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Ascendancy
So if this by some chance goes badly for those wanting marriage for all, what happens to all the same-sex marriages performed thus far? Would that simply mean that companies don't have to acknowledge them when analyzing benefits for their employees and their significant others if they aren't of the opposite sex?


Well, I think there is a law governing those benefits, actually. A mostly unrelated law. It's sad that I forget the name of the law: this was covered in one of my HR classes. sad


__________________

Old Post Dec 10th, 2012 02:50 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Omega Vision
Face Flowed Into Her Eyes

Gender: Male
Location: Miami Metropolitan Area

quote: (post)
Originally posted by dadudemon


Well, I think there is a law governing those benefits, actually. A mostly unrelated law. It's sad that I forget the name of the law: this was covered in one of my HR classes. sad

You took a class on the Harlem Renaissance too?


__________________

“Where the longleaf pines are whispering
to him who loved them so.
Where the faint murmurs now dwindling
echo o’er tide and shore."

-A Grave Epitaph in Santa Rosa County, Florida; I wish I could remember the man's name.

Old Post Dec 10th, 2012 02:58 AM
Omega Vision is currently offline Click here to Send Omega Vision a Private Message Find more posts by Omega Vision Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Omega Vision
You took a class on the Harlem Renaissance too?


You sunnuva...

No. sad We did cover that in a American Literature History class, but only briefly.


__________________

Old Post Dec 10th, 2012 03:00 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Omega Vision
Face Flowed Into Her Eyes

Gender: Male
Location: Miami Metropolitan Area

quote: (post)
Originally posted by dadudemon
You sunnuva...

No. sad We did cover that in a American Literature History class, but only briefly.

I actually got shanghaied into a Harlem Renaissance class. It was listed as "Major Figures in American Lit", and because it was the only one of that subject that worked with my schedule I had to take it, even though I'd just gotten done with a Black Women in Lit class (which was also listed as a normal Women in Lit class).

I didn't mind taking them, I just wish they wouldn't sneak that kind of thing under my nose.


__________________

“Where the longleaf pines are whispering
to him who loved them so.
Where the faint murmurs now dwindling
echo o’er tide and shore."

-A Grave Epitaph in Santa Rosa County, Florida; I wish I could remember the man's name.

Old Post Dec 10th, 2012 03:12 AM
Omega Vision is currently offline Click here to Send Omega Vision a Private Message Find more posts by Omega Vision Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Jim Colyer
Restricted

Gender: Male
Location: United States

Account Restricted

Can't the Supreme Court find something better to do?


__________________
JIM COLYER "GIRL ALBUM"
http://www.jimcolyer.com

Old Post Dec 13th, 2012 10:21 PM
Jim Colyer is currently offline Click here to Send Jim Colyer a Private Message Find more posts by Jim Colyer Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Jim Colyer
Can't the Supreme Court find something better to do?


ya, how dare it focus on matters of individual rights under the constitution!


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Dec 13th, 2012 10:34 PM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Lestov16
CTU Field Agent

Gender: Male
Location: 4th Street Underpass, Manhattan

Let's finally show these religious nuts that the right to opinion does not mean the right to promote ignorance!


__________________


"Tell him that you've got credible intelligence about a threat to his life"-
Jack Bauer

Old Post Dec 13th, 2012 11:30 PM
Lestov16 is currently offline Click here to Send Lestov16 a Private Message Find more posts by Lestov16 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
dadudemon
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: Bacta Tank.

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Lestov16
Let's finally show these religious nuts that the right to opinion does not mean the right to promote ignorance!


Actually, that is exactly what that means.


__________________

Old Post Dec 14th, 2012 10:51 AM
dadudemon is currently offline Click here to Send dadudemon a Private Message Find more posts by dadudemon Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Lestov16
CTU Field Agent

Gender: Male
Location: 4th Street Underpass, Manhattan

I know sad
Sucks that humanity's greatest strength is also it's most debilitating weakness.


__________________


"Tell him that you've got credible intelligence about a threat to his life"-
Jack Bauer

Old Post Dec 14th, 2012 10:58 AM
Lestov16 is currently offline Click here to Send Lestov16 a Private Message Find more posts by Lestov16 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
All times are UTC. The time now is 09:26 AM.
Pages (2): [1] 2 »   Last Thread   Next Thread

Home » Community » General Discussion Forum » Supreme Court takes on Same-Sex Marriage

Email this Page
Subscribe to this Thread
   Post New Thread  Post A Reply

Forum Jump:
Search by user:
 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON

Text-only version
 

< - KillerMovies.com - Forum Archive - Forum Rules >


© Copyright 2000-2006, KillerMovies.com. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by: vBulletin, copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.