LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)
Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus
- Kraken
- Posts: 43779
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
- Location: The Hub of the Universe
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
My editing business's website reserves the right to refuse any assignment for any reason, without disclosing said reason. This is a right that I bestowed upon myself to get out of (1) writing and editing illiterate material, such as student papers; and (2) writing and editing offensive material.
So if a neo-nazi wants to hire me to edit a screed about inferior races, do I have to do that?
So if a neo-nazi wants to hire me to edit a screed about inferior races, do I have to do that?
- ImLawBoy
- Forum Admin
- Posts: 14977
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:49 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Neo-Nazis are not a protected class. You're good.Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:50 pm My editing business's website reserves the right to refuse any assignment for any reason, without disclosing said reason. This is a right that I bestowed upon myself to get out of (1) writing and editing illiterate material, such as student papers; and (2) writing and editing offensive material.
So if a neo-nazi wants to hire me to edit a screed about inferior races, do I have to do that?
That's my purse! I don't know you!
- Jaymann
- Posts: 19478
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
- Location: California
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
What if they were Neo-Nazi transvestites?ImLawBoy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:03 pmNeo-Nazis are not a protected class. You're good.Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:50 pm My editing business's website reserves the right to refuse any assignment for any reason, without disclosing said reason. This is a right that I bestowed upon myself to get out of (1) writing and editing illiterate material, such as student papers; and (2) writing and editing offensive material.
So if a neo-nazi wants to hire me to edit a screed about inferior races, do I have to do that?
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
- Ænima
- Posts: 788
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:48 pm
- Location: New Plymouth, New Zealand
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
(Yet)ImLawBoy wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:03 pmNeo-Nazis are not a protected class. You're good.Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:50 pm My editing business's website reserves the right to refuse any assignment for any reason, without disclosing said reason. This is a right that I bestowed upon myself to get out of (1) writing and editing illiterate material, such as student papers; and (2) writing and editing offensive material.
So if a neo-nazi wants to hire me to edit a screed about inferior races, do I have to do that?
- Defiant
- Posts: 21045
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: Tongue in cheek
- Ralph-Wiggum
- Posts: 17449
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 8:51 am
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Damn that nefarious Hillary Rodham Clinton!Today, HRC urged the Governor of Bermuda — John Rankin — to veto legislation passed by the Bermuda Parliament repealing marriage equality.
Black Lives Matter
- Defiant
- Posts: 21045
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: Tongue in cheek
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
For the first time in four years, GLAAD found that fewer non-LGBT adults are comfortable with their LGBT peers.
The annual GLAAD survey asks non-LGBT Americans to describe how comfortable they are in several scenarios involving LGBT people, like learning that a doctor is LGBT, witnessing a same-sex couple holding hands, or worshipping alongside an LGBT person at church.
This year’s version, conducted in November 2017, found “a decline with people’s comfort year-over-year,” not just in a few of the scenarios, but “in every LGBTQ situation.”
For example, in 2016, 27 percent of non-LGBT Americans said that they would be “very” or “somewhat” uncomfortable with learning that a family member is LGBT; in 2017, that figure jumped all the way up to 32 percent.
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
BBC
The UK government has said it would not be "appropriate" to block Bermuda's decision to repeal same-sex marriage.
On Wednesday the British overseas territory became the first country in the world to pass, and then revoke, the law, replacing gay marriage with domestic partnerships.
The decision also means cruise ships registered in Bermuda are likely to be banned from hosting same-sex weddings.
...
The Caribbean island, which is home to 60,000 people, legalised marriage between homosexual couples in May 2017, following a Supreme Court ruling.
But the new Domestic Partnership Act, approved by Bermuda Governor John Rankin on Wednesday, rolls back the legalisation.
Instead of marriage, the act allows gay or straight couples to form a partnership, which the Bermuda government says carries equivalent rights.
...
Because of Bermuda's status as an overseas dependent territory, the UK government had the power to block the law change.
But Foreign Office minister Harriett Baldwin told MPs: "After full and careful consideration in regards to Bermuda's constitutional and international obligations, the Secretary decided that in these circumstances it would not be appropriate to use this power to block legislation, which can only can be used where there is a legal or constitutional basis for doing so, and even then only in exceptional circumstances."
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- Holman
- Posts: 28980
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:00 pm
- Location: Between the Schuylkill and the Wissahickon
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
MAGA!!Defiant wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:10 pm For the first time in four years, GLAAD found that fewer non-LGBT adults are comfortable with their LGBT peers.
The annual GLAAD survey asks non-LGBT Americans to describe how comfortable they are in several scenarios involving LGBT people, like learning that a doctor is LGBT, witnessing a same-sex couple holding hands, or worshipping alongside an LGBT person at church.
This year’s version, conducted in November 2017, found “a decline with people’s comfort year-over-year,” not just in a few of the scenarios, but “in every LGBTQ situation.”
For example, in 2016, 27 percent of non-LGBT Americans said that they would be “very” or “somewhat” uncomfortable with learning that a family member is LGBT; in 2017, that figure jumped all the way up to 32 percent.
In Trump country, Bigot Americans needn't hide their God-given racism, sexism, and homophobia.
Much prefer my Nazis Nuremberged.
- $iljanus
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 13689
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:46 pm
- Location: New England...or under your bed
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Next on the agenda: Let's bring the words "queer" and "retard" back to recess where they belong. To instill grit and character in our heterosexual, average intelligence children!Holman wrote:MAGA!!Defiant wrote: ↑Thu Jan 25, 2018 6:10 pm For the first time in four years, GLAAD found that fewer non-LGBT adults are comfortable with their LGBT peers.
The annual GLAAD survey asks non-LGBT Americans to describe how comfortable they are in several scenarios involving LGBT people, like learning that a doctor is LGBT, witnessing a same-sex couple holding hands, or worshipping alongside an LGBT person at church.
This year’s version, conducted in November 2017, found “a decline with people’s comfort year-over-year,” not just in a few of the scenarios, but “in every LGBTQ situation.”
For example, in 2016, 27 percent of non-LGBT Americans said that they would be “very” or “somewhat” uncomfortable with learning that a family member is LGBT; in 2017, that figure jumped all the way up to 32 percent.
In Trump country, Bigot Americans needn't hide their God-given racism, sexism, and homophobia.
Black lives matter!
Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
And here's the Kim Davis book:
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon/rolleyes.gif)
That's right, she's now psychic. And props for working the word 'pounding' into a reference to homosexual men that would dog-whistle the target demographic.“Under God’s Authority: The Kim Davis Story” is being promoted and sold by the Orlando-based Liberty Counsel, which defended Davis in her legal battles and describes itself as “a nationwide public interest religious civil liberties law firm.”
A description of the book says “Kim chronicles her dramatic encounters with furious, fist-pounding, homosexual men and the hate mail that flooded her office.”
“Kim takes you behind-the-scenes of the unlikely saga that took America by storm in 2015,” according to the description. “She tells how God transformed her life in 2011, why she almost retired in 2014, and how she knew — six months before the U.S. Supreme Court's disastrous 2015 same-sex ‘marriage’ opinion — she was headed for jail.”
...
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who was on hand to congratulate Davis when she was released from jail, wrote a foreward for the book. The back covering of the book also includes quotes from Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin and Franklin Graham, the head of Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon/rolleyes.gif)
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- hepcat
- Posts: 51486
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
I really hope this becomes part of a public reading event at gay bars. I can only imagine how great it would be seeing drag queens doing dramatic readings.
He won. Period.
- Remus West
- Posts: 33592
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 5:39 pm
- Location: Not in Westland
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
That would be awesome. Maybe Randy Rainbow will do one and post it so we can tweet it to Trump.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
- Rip
- Posts: 26891
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
- Location: Cajun Country!
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
I feel as though the hate for her is being shoved down my throat.Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:22 am And here's the Kim Davis book:
That's right, she's now psychic. And props for working the word 'pounding' into a reference to homosexual men that would dog-whistle the target demographic.“Under God’s Authority: The Kim Davis Story” is being promoted and sold by the Orlando-based Liberty Counsel, which defended Davis in her legal battles and describes itself as “a nationwide public interest religious civil liberties law firm.”
A description of the book says “Kim chronicles her dramatic encounters with furious, fist-pounding, homosexual men and the hate mail that flooded her office.”
“Kim takes you behind-the-scenes of the unlikely saga that took America by storm in 2015,” according to the description. “She tells how God transformed her life in 2011, why she almost retired in 2014, and how she knew — six months before the U.S. Supreme Court's disastrous 2015 same-sex ‘marriage’ opinion — she was headed for jail.”
...
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who was on hand to congratulate Davis when she was released from jail, wrote a foreward for the book. The back covering of the book also includes quotes from Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin and Franklin Graham, the head of Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse.
![]()
Try the veal.
- Jaymann
- Posts: 19478
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:13 pm
- Location: California
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
FIFYRip wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:32 pmI feel as though the hate for her is being shoved pounded down my throat.Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2018 11:22 am And here's the Kim Davis book:
That's right, she's now psychic. And props for working the word 'pounding' into a reference to homosexual men that would dog-whistle the target demographic.“Under God’s Authority: The Kim Davis Story” is being promoted and sold by the Orlando-based Liberty Counsel, which defended Davis in her legal battles and describes itself as “a nationwide public interest religious civil liberties law firm.”
A description of the book says “Kim chronicles her dramatic encounters with furious, fist-pounding, homosexual men and the hate mail that flooded her office.”
“Kim takes you behind-the-scenes of the unlikely saga that took America by storm in 2015,” according to the description. “She tells how God transformed her life in 2011, why she almost retired in 2014, and how she knew — six months before the U.S. Supreme Court's disastrous 2015 same-sex ‘marriage’ opinion — she was headed for jail.”
...
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who was on hand to congratulate Davis when she was released from jail, wrote a foreward for the book. The back covering of the book also includes quotes from Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin and Franklin Graham, the head of Billy Graham Evangelistic Association and Samaritan’s Purse.
![]()
Jaymann
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
]==(:::::::::::::>
Black Lives Matter
- GreenGoo
- Posts: 42334
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
- Location: Ottawa, ON
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Oregon
The Oregon Supreme Court on Thursday took the unusual step of suspending a sitting state court judge -- Vance Day of Salem -- for three years.
The high court found that Day, first appointed in 2011 to the bench in Marion County Circuit Court, committed "willful misconduct" and made "willful misstatements" to investigators to cover up the truth.
Day acted with prejudice against same-sex couples by deciding he wouldn't marry them and he instructed his staff to employ a scheme to avoid "public detection" of his plan, the Supreme Court said.
The court singled out as "exceptionally serious misconduct" false claims by Day that he didn't know a man he supervised on probation was a felon. Day allowed the man to handle a gun twice in his presence even though Day had told him in court that he was forbidden from handling firearms, the court said.
The court also found that Day lied about being assaulted by a referee or sports official at his son's Chemeketa Community College soccer game.
...
The suspension is far longer than any other imposed in the Supreme Court's history, with the exception of two Oregon judges it ordered removed from office: Multnomah County Circuit Judge Shirley Field in 1978 for inability to cope with emotional problems and Josephine County Circuit Judge Kim Jordan in 1981 for accusations that he lied under oath and found a defendant guilty of a crime in the absence of a defense attorney.
...
But a three-year suspension is a grave dishonor in the legal profession and he won't be able to run for re-election during that time. He also won't be paid for the remainder of his term.
...
Day refused to marry same-sex couples; he included a portrait of Adolf Hitler as part of a "Hall of Heroes" artwork display he erected in the Marion County Courthouse; Day shoved his judicial business card at his son’s soccer referee in an attempt to intimidate the referee into backing off; and Day wrongfully allowed a felon to handle a firearm.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Louisiana
A split Louisiana Supreme Court on Friday shot down Gov. John Bel Edwards’ order that bans companies contracting with the state from discriminating against LGBT employees.
The 4-3 majority, without comment, refused to hear Edwards' appeal, which essentially nullified his April 13, 2016, executive order.
Trial and appellate courts had ruled Edwards overstepped his authority by issuing an order when the Legislature disagreed on the policy of creating a “gender identity” protection within the state’s executive branch agencies, including those headed by elected officials, as well as the private companies seeking to do business with state government.
...
Attorney General Jeff Landry, who had legally challenged the Edwards order, commended the Supreme Court’s decision in an email.
...
But Landry said the issue wasn’t over sexual orientation. He argued the April 2016 order was invalid because Edwards was essentially making a law that circumvented the Legislature’s position on the issue.
Fifteen Republican legislators asked Landry to weigh in on which branch of state government has the constitutional authority to add “gender identity” to the protections in Louisiana anti-discrimination laws. Repeated efforts to pass laws that would protect the rights of LGBT people have failed in the Louisiana Legislature.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
NPRIsgrimnur wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:52 am Advocate
Hours after oral arguments concluded in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case — where a Colorado baker argued to the Supreme Court that his religion allows him to refuse service to gay people — Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was confronted on legalized discrmination during today's White House press briefing.
SCOTUSBlogThe U.S. Supreme court dodged a major ruling on the question of whether business owners can refuse services to gay individuals based on their religious objections.
In a case brought by a Colorado baker, the court ruled by a 7-2 vote that he did not get a fair hearing on his complaint because the Colorado Civil Rights Commission demonstrated a hostility to religion in its treatment of his case.
Writing for the case, Justice Anthony Kennedy said that while it is unexceptional that Colorado law "can protect gay persons in acquiring products and services on the same terms and conditions that are offered to other members of the public, the law must be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion."
He said that in this case the Colorado baker, Jack Phillips, understandably had difficulty in knowing where to draw the line because the state law at the time afforded store keepers some latitude to decline creating specific messages they considered offensive. Kennedy pointed to the Colorado commission's decision allowing a different baker to refuse to put an anti-gay message on a cake.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented. The court's four most conservative justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts, concurred with the decision offering different rationales for the future.
Kennedy went out of his way to say that decisions on specific cases in the future may well be different.
Here, Kennedy observed, the “neutral and respectful consideration to which Phillips was entitled was compromised” by comments by members of the Colorado Civil Rights Commission. One commissioner, Kennedy pointed out, “even went so far as to compare Phillips’ invocation of his sincerely held religious beliefs to defenses of slavery and the Holocaust.” Moreover, Kennedy added, the commission’s treatment of Phillips’ religious objections was at odds with its rulings in the cases of bakers who refused to create cakes “with images that conveyed disapproval of same-sex marriage.” Therefore, Kennedy concluded, the commission’s order – which, among other things, required Phillips to sell same-sex couples wedding cakes or anything else that he would sell to opposite-sex couples and mandated remedial training and compliance reports – “must be set aside.”
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- hepcat
- Posts: 51486
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
We're one step closer to forcing all homosexuals back into the closet, and keeping minorities away from normal folk's drinking fountains.
He won. Period.
- Grifman
- Posts: 21266
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:17 pm
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
'
That's unduly alarmist. If you've read the Supreme Court decision there's no way you can come to that conclusion. Two liberal members of the court would never agree with an opinion in which there was any hint of that, and neither would Kennedy, who wrote the decision affirming gay marriage.
Last edited by Grifman on Mon Jun 04, 2018 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions. – G.K. Chesterton
- hepcat
- Posts: 51486
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Sadly, they’re becoming the minority.
I just find the whole concept of allowing someone to discriminate against another human being based solely on the way they were born sickening. That they hide their bigoted views behind a veneer of so called Christian values is even more galling. The KKK called themselves a Christian group. I had hoped we were past believing that kind of crap though. I think it’s time for real Christians to stop being so meek and make themselves heard. Otherwise they’re going to find themselves inextricably lumped in with the current wave of hateful evangelicals that seem to dominate nowadays.
Also, where have you been? R&P is 90 percent alarmist. When Obama was in office, we were becoming socialists. When Trump took over, we started heading towards fascism.![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon/wink.gif)
I just find the whole concept of allowing someone to discriminate against another human being based solely on the way they were born sickening. That they hide their bigoted views behind a veneer of so called Christian values is even more galling. The KKK called themselves a Christian group. I had hoped we were past believing that kind of crap though. I think it’s time for real Christians to stop being so meek and make themselves heard. Otherwise they’re going to find themselves inextricably lumped in with the current wave of hateful evangelicals that seem to dominate nowadays.
Also, where have you been? R&P is 90 percent alarmist. When Obama was in office, we were becoming socialists. When Trump took over, we started heading towards fascism.
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon/wink.gif)
He won. Period.
- Blackhawk
- Posts: 43851
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
- Location: Southwest Indiana
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
I have a number of gay friends, and the overwhelming response I've seen online from them is that the conservative viewpoint on their rights has just been absolutely affirmed and their rights neutered, rather than the decision having nothing to do (directly) with gay rights.
But I do get where their response is coming from. I see the world of fear-almost-paranoia they live in where they never know who's going to backhand them (sometimes literally) next.
But I do get where their response is coming from. I see the world of fear-almost-paranoia they live in where they never know who's going to backhand them (sometimes literally) next.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
They punted on the issue that caused the hearing and went with, “the government violated the baker’s rights to a fair hearing”. It didn’t overrule that the hearing was valid.
But both sides are going to see/hear/spin it to their own desires/fears/biases. And the way the headlines are being written doesn’t help.
But both sides are going to see/hear/spin it to their own desires/fears/biases. And the way the headlines are being written doesn’t help.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- Unagi
- Posts: 26513
- Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
- Location: Chicago
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Agreed, as long as we all recognize that the label 'liberal' is now commonly used as a boogeyman, and yet they are the only group that gives a shit about this broader understanding of reality and humanity.Grifman wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 5:41 pm'
That's unduly alarmist. If you've read the Supreme Court decision there's no way you can come to that conclusion. Two liberal members of the court would never agree with an opinion in which there was any hint of that, and neither would Kennedy, who wrote the decision affirming gay marriage.
- ImLawBoy
- Forum Admin
- Posts: 14977
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:49 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
I think that many Christians have been quite outspoken. There are churches throughout our city that have rainbow signage welcoming all. The Pope made waves recently when he publicly told a gay man that he is how God made him. The Christians advocating equality can't just shut up the bigoted ones, though.hepcat wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 9:29 pm Sadly, they’re becoming the minority.
I just find the whole concept of allowing someone to discriminate against another human being based solely on the way they were born sickening. That they hide their bigoted views behind a veneer of so called Christian values is even more galling. The KKK called themselves a Christian group. I had hoped we were past believing that kind of crap though. I think it’s time for real Christians to stop being so meek and make themselves heard. Otherwise they’re going to find themselves inextricably lumped in with the current wave of hateful evangelicals that seem to dominate nowadays.
I haven't read the actual case, but this is my understanding, too. It was a procedural decision, and not one that was made on the merits of whether or not the baker could discriminate against gay clients. Much of the media coverage (but not all of it) seems to be missing this distinction.Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:03 pm They punted on the issue that caused the hearing and went with, “the government violated the baker’s rights to a fair hearing”. It didn’t overrule that the hearing was valid.
But both sides are going to see/hear/spin it to their own desires/fears/biases. And the way the headlines are being written doesn’t help.
That's my purse! I don't know you!
- Paingod
- Posts: 13135
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 8:58 am
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Bigotry isn't something easily corrected unless it's based on pure ignorance and the mind is open to change. At best it seems most of this is something we can change with rules and laws, and then need to simply outlive the bigots. When they've died off, hopefully a new wave of people on the right side of history will emerge.
Human intellectual evolution is outpaced by technological evolution at a staggering scale. We all want the world to change for the better as fast as it has with technology, and it's just not possible.
Human intellectual evolution is outpaced by technological evolution at a staggering scale. We all want the world to change for the better as fast as it has with technology, and it's just not possible.
Black Lives Matter
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
2021-01-20: The first good night's sleep I had in 4 years.
- hepcat
- Posts: 51486
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
As Grif stated, I'm being an alarmist. I've posted more than once about what I view as hyperbole, but I do have to ask that I be allowed to commit the same sin from time to time.ImLawBoy wrote: ↑Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:53 am
I think that many Christians have been quite outspoken. There are churches throughout our city that have rainbow signage welcoming all. The Pope made waves recently when he publicly told a gay man that he is how God made him. The Christians advocating equality can't just shut up the bigoted ones, though.
In other words, let me be...Presidential!
He won. Period.
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Randazza-hat
![Coffee :coffee:](./images/smilies/coffee.gif)
Those celebrating a "victory" and those bemoaning a "defeat" are both wrong. This case is a punt of epic proportions, leaving nothing resolved. So, if you're a Gay Rights fan, to the extent you would sacrifice the First Amendment at the altar of "equality," then you should not feel defeated. If you're a First Amendment advocate, you really shouldn't feel too smug – except in knowing that you have a guaranteed two votes when this comes up again. However, you should also understand that you definitely don't have Ginsburg or Sotomayor on your side either (they wrote the dissent).
So, once this case finally gets back to the Supreme Court, it is a 2-2 tie at the outset.
![Coffee :coffee:](./images/smilies/coffee.gif)
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- hepcat
- Posts: 51486
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
I would never BAM an expert like Randazza. I just like being right.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- hepcat
- Posts: 51486
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
- Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!
- Isgrimnur
- Posts: 82287
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
- Location: Chookity pok
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon/biggrin.gif)
It's almost as if people are the problem.
- GreenGoo
- Posts: 42334
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
- Location: Ottawa, ON
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Statements like this are such bullshit. It's no more a first amendment question than separate drinking fountains or allowing black people to use your washroom. Segregation had a huge religious backing as well, yet somehow that wasn't a first amendment question. No one wants to sacrifice the first amendment so people can be treated like people. People are free to hate others and express that hatred all they want. They just can't withhold services based on that hate. This "question" was answered over 1/2 a century ago.Isgrimnur wrote: ↑Tue Jun 05, 2018 1:15 pm Randazza-hat
So, if you're a Gay Rights fan, to the extent you would sacrifice the First Amendment at the altar of "equality," then you should not feel defeated.
The fact that gay people are not necessarily black people does not change the basic premise and spirit of the law, and that should be clear to anyone who is not looking for a way around it. If the law needs to be changed so that "technically" it covers situations such as this, then change it, but don't turn this into a horse race with equally valid points of view. It is not.
Fuck off, Randazza.
- gbasden
- Posts: 7670
- Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:57 am
- Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Completely agreed.
- Rip
- Posts: 26891
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
- Location: Cajun Country!
- Contact:
- raydude
- Posts: 3894
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 9:22 am
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Rip wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:32 pm Totally called it, it IS coming.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/three-adu ... -1.3973546
![]()
![Image](https://thumb.ibb.co/ksht5J/broken.png)
- Unagi
- Posts: 26513
- Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
- Location: Chicago
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
You totally called something that already happened 11 years ago?Rip wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:32 pm Totally called it, it IS coming.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/three-adu ... -1.3973546
![]()
You should really read the articles you share.It's not the first time a Canadian court has recognized that a family can have three legally recognized parents. In 2007, for example, the Ontario Court of Appeal recognized both women in a lesbian couple as the mothers of a child whose biological father was already deemed a legal parent. But the three adults in that case were not in a relationship.
![Coffee :coffee:](./images/smilies/coffee.gif)
- Rip
- Posts: 26891
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
- Location: Cajun Country!
- Contact:
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Yea, that one in 2007 was not recognition of a relationship of more than two people. Just wander if we will get there in time for me to build my harem.Unagi wrote: ↑Mon Jun 18, 2018 7:39 amYou totally called something that already happened 11 years ago?Rip wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:32 pm Totally called it, it IS coming.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/three-adu ... -1.3973546
You should really read the articles you share.It's not the first time a Canadian court has recognized that a family can have three legally recognized parents. In 2007, for example, the Ontario Court of Appeal recognized both women in a lesbian couple as the mothers of a child whose biological father was already deemed a legal parent. But the three adults in that case were not in a relationship.
![]()
- Skinypupy
- Posts: 20392
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:12 am
- Location: Utah
Re: Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases
Well, that settles it. We should definitely outlaw same sex marriage now!Rip wrote: ↑Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:32 pm Totally called it, it IS coming.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/three-adu ... -1.3973546
![]()
When darkness veils the world, four Warriors of Light shall come.