California gay marriage ban gaining steam

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
User avatar
Ohma
Jedi Knight
Posts: 644
Joined: 2008-03-18 10:06am
Location: Oregon
Contact:

Thank you!

Post by Ohma »

You have made my day a happy one, thank you very much. :D

Is it all right with you if I quote that "you're just voting the way you are because the thought of a cock thrusting back and forth in your ass and making your own cock hard from the stimulation to your prostate is scaring the hell out of you." bit in my sig?

...though it occurs to me that it may not work as well out of context but what the hey!
Oh, Mister Darcy! <3
We're ALL Devo!
GALE-Force: Guardians of Space!
"Rarr! Rargharghiss!" -Gorn
User avatar
Ohma
Jedi Knight
Posts: 644
Joined: 2008-03-18 10:06am
Location: Oregon
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Ohma »

Wait WHAT?! NOT WHAT I MEANT TO DO PLEASE MODS DELETE THAT!! :shock:
Oh, Mister Darcy! <3
We're ALL Devo!
GALE-Force: Guardians of Space!
"Rarr! Rargharghiss!" -Gorn
User avatar
Superman
Pink Foamin' at the Mouth
Posts: 9690
Joined: 2002-12-16 12:29am
Location: Metropolis

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Superman »

Kodiak, why not just admit that this is really about your religious beliefs? You honestly think that, no matter what we might learn in the future, the concept of marriage is to always remain as it is? This reminds me of the religious types who harp against premarital sex because "no birth control is 100% effective," but, in reality, they just can't tolerate the idea that people can have sex without consequences.

So gay folks can have civil unions. America has tried this whole "separate but equal" business before, remember? Separate is not equal, and, last time I checked, this country was supposed to be about equality.
Image
User avatar
CaptainChewbacca
Browncoat Wookiee
Posts: 15746
Joined: 2003-05-06 02:36am
Location: Deep beneath Boatmurdered.

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by CaptainChewbacca »

Stark wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote: I asked this earlier; what protections are present in a marriage contract in California that aren't present in civil unions?
This logic is awesome. Be happy with your discriminatory exclusion from the club of a concept as old as human civilisation! The name's not important, which is why it's so important to keep YOU GAY PEOPLE out of it!
...what?

I'm trying to figure out what 'Marriage' gives that civil unions don't. Alyrium actually gave me an answer, for which I thank him.
Stuart: The only problem is, I'm losing track of which universe I'm in.
You kinda look like Jesus. With a lightsaber.- Peregrin Toker
ImageImage
User avatar
Superman
Pink Foamin' at the Mouth
Posts: 9690
Joined: 2002-12-16 12:29am
Location: Metropolis

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Superman »

CaptainChewbacca wrote:I'm trying to figure out what 'Marriage' gives that civil unions don't.
Equality.
Image
User avatar
LMSx
Jedi Knight
Posts: 880
Joined: 2002-07-03 09:23pm

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by LMSx »

Why indeed quibble? Because it IS symbolic, and it's an important symbol to many people who believe that it should maintain its traditional definition. I'm aware that these arguments are the same, by and large, as the ones that were used to advocate racial segregation but I believe that the comparison ends there. There are no "gay only" stores, "straight only" lunch counters, or anything of the like. As you said, it's a symbolic preference on my part and I don't believe that defining marriage as between a man and a woman does anything to reduce anyone's constitutional rights or demote their welfare.
If gays are discriminated against less then black people, it's not for lack of trying. The difference between a heterosexual and a homosexual is a private affair, while being black means....being visibly different. Given the overlap in trying to keep out the "undesirables" with gay marriage and miscegenation laws, it's difficult to argue that homophobia isn't the toxic sibling of racism.
eyl
Jedi Knight
Posts: 714
Joined: 2007-01-30 11:03am
Location: City of Gold and Iron

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by eyl »

Though I may be stating the obvious, is Kodiak aware that the traditional definition of marriage he espouses isn't constant even in its religious context? Since he invoked the example of Judaism, the latter (as has been pointed out) originally allowed multiple wives, which was later restricted to 4 wives (by the Talmud); and even later, polygamy was banned altogether (mostly) by the Ban of Rabbi Gershom around 1000 AD.

So, Kodiak - how exactly do you select which "traditional marriage" is the correct one - and since there are multiple choices, what makes one definition more acceptable than the other?
User avatar
Molyneux
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7186
Joined: 2005-03-04 08:47am
Location: Long Island

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Molyneux »

Kodiak wrote:I live in California, and I'm voting "Yes" on prop 8.
Do me a quick favor, please - it won't take long at all - and look up the arguments used against miscenegation. Then compare them with the arguments you've used or heard in favor of Proposition 8.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
User avatar
Plekhanov
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3991
Joined: 2004-04-01 11:09pm
Location: Mercia

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Plekhanov »

Kodiak wrote: I support the "traditional" definition of marriage because I believe it's correct.
So does this mean that you think divorce should be forbidden and that divorcees shouldn't be allowed to remarry?

Do you think that wives should have a inferior status within marriage 'submit themselves unto their husbands as unto the Lord'?

Or is your belief in 'the "traditional" definition of marriage' limited to excluding homosexuals from it?
User avatar
Hillary
Jedi Master
Posts: 1261
Joined: 2005-06-29 11:31am
Location: Londinium

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Hillary »

Guardsman Bass wrote:
Perhaps you're not aware that any church which does NOT recognize same-sex marriages could be classified as a "hate group" and sued? This would cause hundreds of churches to either compromise their beliefs or lose tax-exempt status.
If one of these groups seriously made it an issue (which is unlikely - there weren't a rush of lawsuits by gay couples to force churches to recognize these marriages when Massachusetts legalized gay marriage, or when Canada did it). Besides, what type of gay couple is seriously going to want to be married in a church that absolutely loathes them?
More's the point - they SHOULD be fucking sued and have their tax-exempt status taken away if they refuse to cease their illegal descrimination. And such churches are "hate groups", so it's not exactly unfair to classify them so.

I have to "compromise my beliefs" every time I meet a wanker like Kodiak, as it's against the law to throw a brick at them.
What is WRONG with you people
User avatar
Sriad
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3028
Joined: 2002-12-02 09:59pm
Location: Colorado

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Sriad »

Covenant wrote:At least the Foodamentalists wouldn't be able to claim that they didn't get a fair, one-on-one chance to debate their point of view against the Catheists and the other Catfood Progressives. It is probably a foregone conclusion, this is hardly a heavy-hitter style of debate. An appeal to tradition isn't something you can go to war on.
I'd also be in favor of seeing this in the Colosseum for these (delightfully phrased) reasons. That section has been dormant for a long time, Kodiak has volunteered for his half, and Alyrium (among other motivated posters) have already stepped up for opposition.

Let's make this happen!
User avatar
Shroom Man 777
FUCKING DICK-STABBER!
Posts: 21222
Joined: 2003-05-11 08:39am
Location: Bleeding breasts and stabbing dicks since 2003
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Shroom Man 777 »

Voting yes to this Proposition will "not have an affect on the civil rights of gays" but it will piss gay people off severely.

Voting no to this Proposition won't have an effect either. But it will make gay people happy and gay.

Umm... I will vote yes because I am a dick and I heard that gays like dick?



Voting either yes or no will not have an effect on a straight person's life and will have no effect on heterosexual couples, married or not. However, voting either yes or no WILL have an effect on the gay community - one option will piss them off and ruin their day (or lives), the other will make their day better and will make them live happier lives.

But... being nice to other people is not a social prerogative? But pissing other people off for no justification other than flimsy "moral" premises is the proper thing to do?


Kodiak is an asshole.
Image "DO YOU WORSHIP HOMOSEXUALS?" - Curtis Saxton (source)
shroom is a lovely boy and i wont hear a bad word against him - LUSY-CHAN!
Shit! Man, I didn't think of that! It took Shroom to properly interpret the screams of dying people :D - PeZook
Shroom, I read out the stuff you write about us. You are an endless supply of morale down here. :p - an OWS street medic
Pink Sugar Heart Attack!
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22456
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Mr Bean »

Hillary wrote:
More's the point - they SHOULD be fucking sued and have their tax-exempt status taken away if they refuse to cease their illegal descrimination. And such churches are "hate groups", so it's not exactly unfair to classify them so.
Quick comment on this, churches in most states don't hand out marriage licenses to my knowledge, that's a function of the state. In some areas(Vegas) churches are one stop shopping for a legal recognized marriage paperwork. But most states(Having helped with a few) even if you have a Bishop, a Rabbi, a Minister an Imam, a Shinto and Buddiest Priest all witness your wedding, it does not make it legal until you go down to the local court-house and apply for and get your marriage certificate.

Now lets exam real quick what befits "Marriage" gives you

Tax and Joint Filing rights
Heath Insurance Rights/Privliages
Inheritance and Death Benefits
Visitant rights in Hospital and Prison
Positives when looking to Adopt
Pluses when looking for loans, home lines of credit.
Better unemployment payments if one of you cares for the other

I know I'm leaving a few off, not being married myself, but "Civil Unions" in California don't grant everything a traditional man/woman "Marriage" gets even as it is. It's seperate but equal as it is, and I can not, being a fair and ratio person support "Separate but Equal" if it's done to the blacks or the gay's or any other minority group in existence.

We are Americans we all deserve the same rights no matter skin color, religion or sexual preference.
To say anything else is to be a closet bigot, you might not want to think of it that way, dressing it up in terms such as "tradition", but the clear fact is, to support anything else but equal rights for all is discrimination at best, and outright bigotry at worst.

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by General Zod »

Mr Bean wrote: Now lets exam real quick what befits "Marriage" gives you

Tax and Joint Filing rights
Heath Insurance Rights/Privliages
Inheritance and Death Benefits
Visitant rights in Hospital and Prison
Positives when looking to Adopt
Pluses when looking for loans, home lines of credit.
Better unemployment payments if one of you cares for the other
One of the big things you're missing is recognition of privileges across state lines. Most states don't have to do squat as far as acknowledging civil unions from other states, so if you ever have to move or something happens to your partner while they're traveling you can kiss your benefits from that goodbye.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

General Zod wrote:
Mr Bean wrote: Now lets exam real quick what befits "Marriage" gives you

Tax and Joint Filing rights
Heath Insurance Rights/Privliages
Inheritance and Death Benefits
Visitant rights in Hospital and Prison
Positives when looking to Adopt
Pluses when looking for loans, home lines of credit.
Better unemployment payments if one of you cares for the other
One of the big things you're missing is recognition of privileges across state lines. Most states don't have to do squat as far as acknowledging civil unions from other states, so if you ever have to move or something happens to your partner while they're traveling you can kiss your benefits from that goodbye.
Well the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act nullifies that part with marriages(or at least gay ones...). However it is also blatantly unconstitutional, violating both the 14th amendment, and the full faith and credit clause. Problem is, a gay person has to be married before they will have standing to challenge it
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Kodiak
Jedi Master
Posts: 1400
Joined: 2005-07-08 02:19pm
Location: The City in the Country

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Kodiak »

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
General Zod wrote:
Mr Bean wrote: Now lets exam real quick what befits "Marriage" gives you

Tax and Joint Filing rights
Heath Insurance Rights/Privliages
Inheritance and Death Benefits
Visitant rights in Hospital and Prison
Positives when looking to Adopt
Pluses when looking for loans, home lines of credit.
Better unemployment payments if one of you cares for the other
One of the big things you're missing is recognition of privileges across state lines. Most states don't have to do squat as far as acknowledging civil unions from other states, so if you ever have to move or something happens to your partner while they're traveling you can kiss your benefits from that goodbye.
Well the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act nullifies that part with marriages(or at least gay ones...). However it is also blatantly unconstitutional, violating both the 14th amendment, and the full faith and credit clause. Problem is, a gay person has to be married before they will have standing to challenge it
Ok, so after hearing new arguments in this thread and ignoring the hissy-fit tirades (sorry, but there were too many to read through) I have come to a conclusion: I cannot support prop 8 as I believe it contradicts the intention of the US Constitution and is morally indefensible. You might ask "Doesn't your religion urge you to vote in favor of prop 8?" It has, on a large scale, and it is part of the ProtectMarriage.org coalition. I feel that I must vote my beliefs on this one, however, even when they break with the church.

Here are some things I do believe after reading through this thread and re-evaluating some previous beliefs I have held:

1. All people have a right to equal treatment under the law.
2. Civil Unions do NOT provide equal standing, namely that they only extend to state borders (I did not comprehend this previously, my fault entirely)
3. A "Yes" vote on prop 8 would perpetuate an inequality which flies in the face of what I believe to be God's will that we love and respect one another.
4. I have no right, whether in the minority or majority, to presume that my personal beliefs on morality based on personal experience should be applied to any group with any force of the law against their will.
5. I realize now that my previous stance on Prop 8 was bigoted, but motivated by religious beliefs and not any personal hatred. I'm not homophobic, nor do I have secret fantasies about a cock being anywhere near my ass that isn't my own (let's be honest, a man's cock is close to his own ass and there's no way around that)
6. If you want to help a person understand your position, screaming and raging does little good. Illustrating your OWN side of the argument and helping those ignorant of anything but the talking points presented to them understand the full ramifications of a bill is far better (Thanks AD).
7. A no vote on Prop 8 puts me and my Mormon friends one step closer to getting our polygamy back 8)

Thanks to all of you who presented well thought out arguments and helped me understand this issue fully. To those of you who just ranted and raved and didn't contribute anything helpful, fuck off :)
Image PRFYNAFBTFCP
Captain of the MFS Frigate of Pizazz +2 vs. Douchebags - Est vicis pro nonnullus suscito vir

"Are you an idiot? What demand do you think there is for aircraft carriers that aren't government?" - Captain Chewbacca

"I keep my eighteen wives in wonderfully appointed villas by bringing the underwear of god to the heathens. They will come to know God through well protected goodies." - Gandalf

"There is no such thing as being too righteous to understand." - Darth Wong
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

Did hell just...get cold? Someone changed their position on the internet. I don't know what to say.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
Kodiak
Jedi Master
Posts: 1400
Joined: 2005-07-08 02:19pm
Location: The City in the Country

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Kodiak »

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Did hell just...get cold? Someone changed their position on the internet. I don't know what to say.
Are we all so shocked to think that people cannot be swayed by intelligent discourse? I've never been so arrogant (probably someone will produce proof that I have been :banghead: ) to say that I'm an authority on everything I talk about and that I will never change my mind. What can I say, except that I learned new things, saw new perspectives, and what I saw and learned changed my mind.
Image PRFYNAFBTFCP
Captain of the MFS Frigate of Pizazz +2 vs. Douchebags - Est vicis pro nonnullus suscito vir

"Are you an idiot? What demand do you think there is for aircraft carriers that aren't government?" - Captain Chewbacca

"I keep my eighteen wives in wonderfully appointed villas by bringing the underwear of god to the heathens. They will come to know God through well protected goodies." - Gandalf

"There is no such thing as being too righteous to understand." - Darth Wong
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

Kodiak wrote:
Alyrium Denryle wrote:Did hell just...get cold? Someone changed their position on the internet. I don't know what to say.
Are we all so shocked to think that people cannot be swayed by intelligent discourse? I've never been so arrogant (probably someone will produce proof that I have been :banghead: ) to say that I'm an authority on everything I talk about and that I will never change my mind. What can I say, except that I learned new things, saw new perspectives, and what I saw and learned changed my mind.

It is just so very very rare. Usually if someone does change their mind it is because of after effects of discourse. Starts something going in their heads and a month later they have a different mind-set. It is not often "You know what, you are right"

Thank you for restoring a small portion of my faith in human reason
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
The Yosemite Bear
Mostly Harmless Nutcase (Requiescat in Pace)
Posts: 35211
Joined: 2002-07-21 02:38am
Location: Dave's Not Here Man

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by The Yosemite Bear »

oh, fuck NO!

I shall vote against this prop, I encourage others to vote against this prop. We just had a gay & Lesbian Double wedding last week, and even the baptists have in Mariposia have discovered that gay guys with two male incomes mean a decent amount of money during the new hard times.
Image

The scariest folk song lyrics are "My Boy Grew up to be just like me" from cats in the cradle by Harry Chapin
User avatar
CmdrWilkens
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9093
Joined: 2002-07-06 01:24am
Location: Land of the Crabcake
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by CmdrWilkens »

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Well the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act nullifies that part with marriages(or at least gay ones...). However it is also blatantly unconstitutional, violating both the 14th amendment, and the full faith and credit clause. Problem is, a gay person has to be married before they will have standing to challenge it

Just a minor nitpick as while DOMA certainly violates the 14th amendment it almost cannot (as a function) violate the full faith and credit clause as the same clause grants Congress the ability to regulate the manner in which such cross-state recognition shall take place. That is that Congress is granted the explicit power to control the manner in which court records and judgements (and marriage is a matter of court records) are recognized between the states.

Going back a bit the problem with anti gay marriage movements is that no matter how they are gussied up it is an attempt to play on fears of homosexuality. Prop 8, just as with every other anti gay marriage proposition, seeks to reduce the ability of homsexual (and bi sexual) members of society from enjoying the full benefits of citizenship. Any time you create a second class version of a legal construct it is a de facto reduction in the person's civil rights.There is literally no legal construct that could be created which would be the equal of marriage without BEING marriage otherwise by defentiion they are unequal simply by virtue of being seperate. Creating the "civil union" construct makes gay and bisexual persons a suspect class by requiring them to conform to a seperate set of legal guidelines, even if they are completely equivalent in explicit rights.

Another aside and this is to add to what Bean mentioend but marraige also gives certain rights which are the result of common law and not code. That is things such as privledge, rights of first refusal on wills, hell even the right to divorce as a means of settling property when a relationship dissolves. The later is even probably the biggest. Right now since gay marriage is not a recognized marriage divorce laws protect neither partner (to the extent of my knolwedge) which, in turn, means that in the event a relationship dissolves then property laws designed to deal with roomates and strangers comes in to play.
Image
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner
MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE

"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
User avatar
Kodiak
Jedi Master
Posts: 1400
Joined: 2005-07-08 02:19pm
Location: The City in the Country

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Kodiak »

The Yosemite Bear wrote:oh, fuck NO!

I shall vote against this prop, I encourage others to vote against this prop. We just had a gay & Lesbian Double wedding last week, and even the baptists have in Mariposia have discovered that gay guys with two male incomes mean a decent amount of money during the new hard times.
That's probably one of the most compelling/effective arguments for the religious right: "Gay marriage: it's better for the economy". I'm curious though, how exactly did the baptists "discover" this newfound insight?
Image PRFYNAFBTFCP
Captain of the MFS Frigate of Pizazz +2 vs. Douchebags - Est vicis pro nonnullus suscito vir

"Are you an idiot? What demand do you think there is for aircraft carriers that aren't government?" - Captain Chewbacca

"I keep my eighteen wives in wonderfully appointed villas by bringing the underwear of god to the heathens. They will come to know God through well protected goodies." - Gandalf

"There is no such thing as being too righteous to understand." - Darth Wong
User avatar
Alyrium Denryle
Minister of Sin
Posts: 22224
Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
Location: The Deep Desert
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by Alyrium Denryle »

Just a minor nitpick as while DOMA certainly violates the 14th amendment it almost cannot (as a function) violate the full faith and credit clause as the same clause grants Congress the ability to regulate the manner in which such cross-state recognition shall take place. That is that Congress is granted the explicit power to control the manner in which court records and judgements (and marriage is a matter of court records) are recognized between the states.
See, I dont see it that way. When I real it, and maybe I am nitpicking the language too much, I see it as congress has the authority to regulate the manner in which such documents are recognized, but does not give congress the authority to create exceptions (IE. to say that X document is invalid state to state) and even if they had that authority, they applied that power in an inequitable fashion, and the results did the same thing, thus creating a second 14th amendment violation (the first being the states denying gay marriage in the first place)
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences


There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.

Factio republicanum delenda est
User avatar
CmdrWilkens
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9093
Joined: 2002-07-06 01:24am
Location: Land of the Crabcake
Contact:

Re: California gay marriage ban gaining steam

Post by CmdrWilkens »

Alyrium Denryle wrote:
Just a minor nitpick as while DOMA certainly violates the 14th amendment it almost cannot (as a function) violate the full faith and credit clause as the same clause grants Congress the ability to regulate the manner in which such cross-state recognition shall take place. That is that Congress is granted the explicit power to control the manner in which court records and judgements (and marriage is a matter of court records) are recognized between the states.
See, I dont see it that way. When I real it, and maybe I am nitpicking the language too much, I see it as congress has the authority to regulate the manner in which such documents are recognized, but does not give congress the authority to create exceptions (IE. to say that X document is invalid state to state) and even if they had that authority, they applied that power in an inequitable fashion, and the results did the same thing, thus creating a second 14th amendment violation (the first being the states denying gay marriage in the first place)
Just so the bystanders don't have to go looking I'm gonna put the text up real quick:
Article IV Section 1 wrote:Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
The critical segment is actually the very last little bit where it says "and the effect thereof." Now we could certainly argue that it doesnt' actually give congress the ability to restrict the application of certain public records over another but then we run into the nature of rulings in terms of Congres' power. A direct reading of the constitution would seem to allow no means by which Congress could have created the Civil Rights Act but a rather liberal interpretation of the commerce clause was used as it has been before and since. The poitn being that a long history of judical review has given weight to the idea that congress is granted a great deal of discretion in terms of defining for itself the limits of its pwoer except where explicitly forbidden. Yes you could argue against it but you would be going againt 200 plus years of judicial tradition. That is why I tend to think (though don't like) that a competent court would rule that congress has the right to determine the effects of marriage legisltion in the various states and create a means by which it shall be applied that excludes homosexual marriages.

Now that being said.
14th Amendment Section 1 wrote:Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
I can see no means by which a logical argument could be made that creating a eperate "civil union" legal structure ensures an equl grant of rights to all citizens. Denying marriage to gay couples purely on terms of defining marriage as between a man and a woman alone is a blatant violation of the 14th amendment.
Image
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner
MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE

"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
User avatar
The Duchess of Zeon
Gözde
Posts: 14566
Joined: 2002-09-18 01:06am
Location: Exiled in the Pale of Settlement.

Re: Thank you!

Post by The Duchess of Zeon »

Ohma wrote:You have made my day a happy one, thank you very much. :D

Is it all right with you if I quote that "you're just voting the way you are because the thought of a cock thrusting back and forth in your ass and making your own cock hard from the stimulation to your prostate is scaring the hell out of you." bit in my sig?

...though it occurs to me that it may not work as well out of context but what the hey!

Yeah, sure, go ahead and knock yourself out.
The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. -- Wikipedia's No Original Research policy page.

In 1966 the Soviets find something on the dark side of the Moon. In 2104 they come back. -- Red Banner / White Star, a nBSG continuation story. Updated to Chapter 4.0 -- 14 January 2013.
Post Reply