Obama: Worst President Ever? Topic

tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by swamphawk22 on 6/6/2012 3:26:00 PM (view original):
Can anyone explain what standard makes this a civil rights issue as opposed to a simple regulation applied to marriage in addition to the many marriage regulations in place now?
That was resolved on page 82 when I pointed out the Baker v. Nelson case, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment did not apply to same-sex marriage.

That's when jrd had to change his argument from "there needed to be a compelling legal reason" to ban SSM to "who does it harm" to allow SSM.
6/6/2012 3:34 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Prohibited by who?
6/6/2012 3:34 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 6/6/2012 3:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by swamphawk22 on 6/6/2012 3:26:00 PM (view original):
Can anyone explain what standard makes this a civil rights issue as opposed to a simple regulation applied to marriage in addition to the many marriage regulations in place now?
That was resolved on page 82 when I pointed out the Baker v. Nelson case, in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment did not apply to same-sex marriage.

That's when jrd had to change his argument from "there needed to be a compelling legal reason" to ban SSM to "who does it harm" to allow SSM.
There are technicalities that allow the lower courts to not follow that as precedent and that allow the supreme court to reverse its decision without the normal requirements.
6/6/2012 3:36 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/5/2012 1:42:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, I'm bored with you.   Next time you answer a question with a question, I'm gonna redline it.   

Deal?
By the owner of this thread.
6/6/2012 3:38 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Oh, blocked him a while ago.
6/6/2012 3:40 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by jrd_x on 6/6/2012 11:17:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/6/2012 10:32:00 AM (view original):
Can "tradition" change or is it replaced?
It can change, but it only changes for the same sex couples.  The heterosexual couples see no change.

It's tradition to get a Christmas tree.  I'm assuming your family gets a tree every year (or has an artificial one).

If, this year, my family gets a cactus in December and decorates it and puts presents under it, and plans on using a cactus every year going forward, that changes the tradition for my family.  Does it change the tradition for your family?

How did the guy who blocked me know to respond to my post?

Liar.

6/6/2012 3:52 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Posted by swamphawk22 on 6/6/2012 3:26:00 PM (view original):
Can anyone explain what standard makes this a civil rights issue as opposed to a simple regulation applied to marriage in addition to the many marriage regulations in place now?
I think it is a civil rights issue.

Were interracial marriage bans a civil rights issue?  Were sodomy laws a civil rights issue?
6/6/2012 5:34 PM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect
Posted by jrd_x on 6/6/2012 5:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by swamphawk22 on 6/6/2012 3:26:00 PM (view original):
Can anyone explain what standard makes this a civil rights issue as opposed to a simple regulation applied to marriage in addition to the many marriage regulations in place now?
I think it is a civil rights issue.

Were interracial marriage bans a civil rights issue?  Were sodomy laws a civil rights issue?
A case could be made in both cases.

The question remains where is the line drawn?

Why is the vote of people in 36 states irrelevant?

Is putting that kind of power in the hands of 9 people with no definable standard a good thing in a Democratic Republic?
6/6/2012 5:47 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
Posted by swamphawk22 on 6/6/2012 5:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jrd_x on 6/6/2012 5:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by swamphawk22 on 6/6/2012 3:26:00 PM (view original):
Can anyone explain what standard makes this a civil rights issue as opposed to a simple regulation applied to marriage in addition to the many marriage regulations in place now?
I think it is a civil rights issue.

Were interracial marriage bans a civil rights issue?  Were sodomy laws a civil rights issue?
A case could be made in both cases.

The question remains where is the line drawn?

Why is the vote of people in 36 states irrelevant?

Is putting that kind of power in the hands of 9 people with no definable standard a good thing in a Democratic Republic?
Almost all major civil rights changes come from the courts.  Maybe that's not ideal, but when you look back at the civil rights decisions, most of the time the court was right and the voters were wrong. 
6/6/2012 5:57 PM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect
Posted by jrd_x on 6/6/2012 5:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by swamphawk22 on 6/6/2012 5:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jrd_x on 6/6/2012 5:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by swamphawk22 on 6/6/2012 3:26:00 PM (view original):
Can anyone explain what standard makes this a civil rights issue as opposed to a simple regulation applied to marriage in addition to the many marriage regulations in place now?
I think it is a civil rights issue.

Were interracial marriage bans a civil rights issue?  Were sodomy laws a civil rights issue?
A case could be made in both cases.

The question remains where is the line drawn?

Why is the vote of people in 36 states irrelevant?

Is putting that kind of power in the hands of 9 people with no definable standard a good thing in a Democratic Republic?
Almost all major civil rights changes come from the courts.  Maybe that's not ideal, but when you look back at the civil rights decisions, most of the time the court was right and the voters were wrong. 
This isnt a centuries old law that is passing out of vogue.

These are laws that were passed by the people in the last few years.

And DOMA was just passed by a majority of the Congress.
6/6/2012 8:40 PM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
I don't think that just because a law is recent it is any more valid.

Another judge ruled DOMA unconstitutional today.
6/6/2012 8:46 PM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect
Posted by jrd_x on 6/6/2012 8:46:00 PM (view original):
I don't think that just because a law is recent it is any more valid.

Another judge ruled DOMA unconstitutional today.
So there is no documentable standard other than the whim of Judges?
6/7/2012 2:17 AM
jrd_x
Posts: 1481 (0)
Prospect
3
Prospect
I trust the decision of a judge over the popular vote. "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals."
6/7/2012 10:19 AM
swamphawk22
Posts: 13021 (0)
Hall of Famer
9 4 8 3 84 113 36
Prospect
Posted by jrd_x on 6/7/2012 10:19:00 AM (view original):
I trust the decision of a judge over the popular vote. "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals."
I also give the judges my trust and no matter how the SC decides this I will accept it as law.

Will you give the judges the same trust, or are you just assuming you are going to win?
6/7/2012 10:28 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
We should have a lifetime king.   I don't want dumb, panicky, dangerous people deciding who's in charge. 
6/7/2012 10:33 AM
◂ Prev 1...103|104|105|106|107...462 Next ▸
Obama: Worst President Ever? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.