Total Posts:35|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Same sex marriage in New Jersey

Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 8:59:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Am I the only one who finds this clip to be rather humorous? Skip to 2:39-3:01

Here is the context on the video:

The New Jersey legislator is announcing the results of the same sex marriage bill they are voting on.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's terrible the bill was defeated, but there is just something rather funny about how blindingly indifferent this lady is to other people's feelings.

#
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 9:40:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.

Why don't they put it to the ballot?

You can't put people's constitutional rights up for a popular vote.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 9:43:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 9:40:41 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.

Why don't they put it to the ballot?

You can't put people's constitutional rights up for a popular vote.

I'm not familiar with the Constitution of Massachussetts, but the United States Constitution makes no statement about marriage.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 9:50:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 9:43:06 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:40:41 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.

Why don't they put it to the ballot?

You can't put people's constitutional rights up for a popular vote.

I'm not familiar with the Constitution of Massachussetts, but the United States Constitution makes no statement about marriage.

True, but there is a legal precedent that would validate marriage as a legal institution. And insofar as legal marriages are available to heterosexual couples, then denying gay people the right to marry violates the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
MistahKurtz
Posts: 400
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 11:33:36 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 9:40:41 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.

Why don't they put it to the ballot?

You can't put people's constitutional rights up for a popular vote.

While I agree, I think they should employ any possible means necessary to try and win equality. If the government is too lame and terrible to pass equality, then it must be achieved somehow.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:04:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.

Why don't they put it to the ballot?

I agree, let the people decide.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:07:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 9:50:09 PM, Freeman wrote:
And insofar as legal marriages are available to heterosexual couples, then denying gay people the right to marry violates the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

Not true. Both gay men and straight men have the ability to marry women. The marriage laws don't discriminate.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:09:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:07:07 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:50:09 PM, Freeman wrote:
And insofar as legal marriages are available to heterosexual couples, then denying gay people the right to marry violates the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

Not true. Both gay men and straight men have the ability to marry women. The marriage laws don't discriminate.

There's also precedent of choice being a factor. For example, at one point, everybody in England had the ability to practice Anglicanism, but not the right to practice Catholicism. This would rightly be considered discriminatory towards Catholics.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:14:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:04:43 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.

Why don't they put it to the ballot?

I agree, let the people decide.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:16:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:15:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.


Funny, but a little rude.

Are you sure?
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:16:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:16:13 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:15:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.


Funny, but a little rude.

Are you sure?

HaHaHa
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:51:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:15:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:15:41 PM, wjmelements wrote:
That woman was hilarious.


Funny, but a little rude.

Really? You think that was rude? I thought it was funny; the fact that she's probably ignorant and really has no understanding of gay marriage and its legality.
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:55:08 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:50:37 PM, LeafRod wrote:
I don't want the people to decide. Many of them are too dumb to make the right choice.

I don't believe that, than you hate people who are in jury duty and do not trust them.
TheSkeptic
Posts: 1,362
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:57:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:07:07 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:50:09 PM, Freeman wrote:
And insofar as legal marriages are available to heterosexual couples, then denying gay people the right to marry violates the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

Not true. Both gay men and straight men have the ability to marry women. The marriage laws don't discriminate.

...
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 8:58:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:55:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:50:37 PM, LeafRod wrote:
I don't want the people to decide. Many of them are too dumb to make the right choice.

I don't believe that, than you hate people who are in jury duty and do not trust them.

I don't trust 99.1% of people ...
comoncents
Posts: 5,647
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 9:03:23 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:58:21 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:55:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:50:37 PM, LeafRod wrote:
I don't want the people to decide. Many of them are too dumb to make the right choice.

I don't believe that, than you hate people who are in jury duty and do not trust them.

I don't trust 99.1% of people ...

You should know more than anyone, "gotta have faith..."
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 9:04:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 9:03:23 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:58:21 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:55:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:50:37 PM, LeafRod wrote:
I don't want the people to decide. Many of them are too dumb to make the right choice.

I don't believe that, than you hate people who are in jury duty and do not trust them.

I don't trust 99.1% of people ...

You should know more than anyone, "gotta have faith..."

I have faith in God. I do not have much faith in others. From experience, I'll keep thinking that way.
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 9:05:59 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:57:32 PM, TheSkeptic wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:07:07 PM, wjmelements wrote:
At 1/8/2010 9:50:09 PM, Freeman wrote:
And insofar as legal marriages are available to heterosexual couples, then denying gay people the right to marry violates the due process clause and the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

Not true. Both gay men and straight men have the ability to marry women. The marriage laws don't discriminate.

...

In all technicality, there is no discrimination. Marriage, as it currently stands in most states, is a social contract between a man and a woman. The law doesn't discriminate, as I said before, so it doesn't infringe the 14th amendment.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 9:07:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:50:37 PM, LeafRod wrote:
I don't want the people to decide. Many of them are too dumb to make the right choice.

I prefer tyranny of the majority over tyranny of the minority, though both tyrannies are still tyrannies.
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
wjmelements
Posts: 8,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 9:15:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:50:37 PM, LeafRod wrote:
I don't want the people to decide. Many of them are too dumb to make the right choice.

A better question would be: What would you prefer?
in the blink of an eye you finally see the light
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 10:23:51 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I say put it to a referendum, but don't make it binding. That way you get input from the citizenry, without tying the hands of government on the issue.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 10:26:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 10:23:51 PM, Volkov wrote:
I say put it to a referendum, but don't make it binding. That way you get input from the citizenry, without tying the hands of government on the issue.

That is very insulting to the voters.

A well deserved insult, but as a mainstream liberal you aren't supposed to think so.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 10:30:45 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 10:26:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That is very insulting to the voters.

A well deserved insult, but as a mainstream liberal you aren't supposed to think so.

Since when have I been a populist? The government knows the mood of the voters based on an actual vote's results, and whatever actions are taken thereafter can be condoned or condemned with the next election.
Lexicaholic
Posts: 526
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2010 3:01:38 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/9/2010 8:58:21 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:55:08 PM, comoncents wrote:
At 1/9/2010 8:50:37 PM, LeafRod wrote:
I don't want the people to decide. Many of them are too dumb to make the right choice.

I don't believe that, than you hate people who are in jury duty and do not trust them.

I don't trust 99.1% of people ...

Who's the 0.9%? ^.-
http://mastersofcreationrpg.com... - My new site and long-developed project. Should be fun.