Reagan Appointed Judge Strikes Down Michigan Gay Marriage Ban

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by GatorBen, Mar 21, 2014.

  1. gatorev12
    Offline

    gatorev12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    11,512
    Likes Received:
    259
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,279
    If only this judge would ever review a study on man-made global warming with the same rationale...
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,150
    Likes Received:
    4,060
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,926
    Be careful what you wish for because I don't think you'd get the results you'd like ;)
  3. Emmitto
    Offline

    Emmitto VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    5,343
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +442
    What a baby post from you LD. Why does it bother you so much that The Gay might be just as good as Us?
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  4. asuragator
    Offline

    asuragator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2009
    Messages:
    20,150
    Likes Received:
    4,060
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,926
    Happy as in gay? :D
  5. DaveFla
    Online

    DaveFla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,298
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +920
    Of course, you and just about everyone else in this thread are missing the point... Few, if any, are against same sex couples being able to enjoy the same benefits as that of married couples. It's their insistence that their union be considered a "marriage" that we disagree. Marriage is a religious term, only to be co-opted by the government when they found that they could make money from the union. This has been pointed out dozens of times here, yet you, and many others, seem to disregard this and insist that anyone who disagreed with you are homophobes.

    Some homosexuals are using this as a way to "get back" at the religious minded people. They aren't happy with just being able to enjoy the exact same benefits; they want to force others to accept their lifestyle into the religious realms.

    BTW, this case overturned a vote in which 60% of the population of Michigan said they did not want Michigan to recognize same-sex "marriages." Once again. The minority imposing its will on the majority.
  6. rivergator
    Online

    rivergator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    31,049
    Likes Received:
    324
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,476
    I don't consider 'marriage' a religious term. My marriage certainly isn't. Same with many other people.
    And I imagine govt got involved because there are legal issues involving marriage and divorce.
  7. GatorBen
    Offline

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    6,449
    Likes Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,410
    Well, the legislation getting challenged in all of these cases sure wouldn't seem to agree with you that "civil unions are all fine and dandy, just don't call it a marriage."

    The Michigan amendment at issue:

    To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.

    The Florida amendment:

    Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.

    So...

    Try again?

    That's frankly an asinine point.

    ANY
    law that is overturned pursuant to judicial review will have passed in a majoritarian political system. So you could make that point about literally any case ever, which means it's not a very good point. Not to mention the whole it's completely irrelevant in an equal rights analysis thing since "but lots of folks really want to treat these people different," believe it or not, is not one of the tests.
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2014
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. g8orbill
    Online

    g8orbill Gators VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    68,306
    Likes Received:
    4,000
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Clermont, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +7,933
    we noticed
  9. DaveFla
    Online

    DaveFla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,298
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +920
    Of course YOU don't...
  10. DaveFla
    Online

    DaveFla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,298
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +920
    I get it.. You don't (or won't). You took the bait. I will not.

    That's fine. I can live with this.
  11. rivergator
    Online

    rivergator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    31,049
    Likes Received:
    324
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,476
    and the fact that YOU do means what?
  12. DaveFla
    Online

    DaveFla Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    18,298
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +920
    You do the math.
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. rivergator
    Online

    rivergator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    31,049
    Likes Received:
    324
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,476
    No answer, huh? Shocked, I tell you, shocked. Time for you bring out "lemmings" and "river dance," I imagine. You know, when you don't have anything else.
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  14. GatorBen
    Offline

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    6,449
    Likes Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,410
    Good ol' Dave.

    Come in, insist that no one else actually understands what people are arguing ("We don't have a problem with civil unions!"), have someone point out that the facts don't back up his version of the arguments ("Then why did all these states ban civil unions too?"), and then depart with some insult that makes very little sense and having contributed absolutely nothing to the discussion.

    It's a hard role, but I guess someone's got to do it.
    • Like Like x 2
  15. GatorBen
    Offline

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    6,449
    Likes Received:
    338
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,410
    Can I take this opportunity to point out the inherent lemming-ness of using "lemmings" as the new mot du jour amongst the wingy bunch? Because it happens to be one insult that I never really saw until Rand used it in his CPAC speech a couple of weeks ago, at which point the far right followed their leader, picked it up en masse, and ran it off the cliff.

    (And yes, I understand that my analogy exhibits only a slightly greater understanding of what lemmings are known for than Rand's did, but after all, unlike him I did at least tie in the whole cliff thing. :D)
  16. Lawdog88
    Offline

    Lawdog88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    30,061
    Likes Received:
    468
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Inside the War Room, No Name City, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,551

    Hey E-Mitts, that is not a problem, at least, if you think practicing homosexuals are as good as you.

    Frankly, if they would just admit that they are as good as me, they would be admitting that they are as unclean as a leper, and need to be cleansed just like I did, and do, frequently.

    Instead, they wish to justify their behavior, and call it good.
  17. Emmitto
    Offline

    Emmitto VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    5,343
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +442
    Right, the minority should always be subjected to the whim of the majority. Although, ironically, I doubt the majority agrees with that. Not the thinkers, anyway. After all, everyone finds themselves in the minority here and there. That's only one of the points that you can't seem to grasp.

    How will gay marriage diminish yours or anyone's? And what events led to these marriages being so vulnerable?
  18. Emmitto
    Offline

    Emmitto VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    5,343
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +442
    I have no reason to believe "practicing homosexuals" are better or worse than you or me. They seem to me to be just like the rest of the world, some good, some bad, most somewhere in between. I don't understand how I have any right to demand an admission of any kind from them or anyone else. Nor deny them the same rights everyone else enjoys. I guess if there were some sort of purity test for all marriages, I could bet on board with forcing them to do the same. But that would probably really suppress the marriage planner industry.

    There is no reason for them to "justify their behavior", anymore than it's required for you to do so.

    Or to put it another way, yeah, I generally find gay people just as "good" as myself. Or you.
  19. MichiGator2002
    Offline

    MichiGator2002 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,589
    Likes Received:
    403
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,707
    How does calling tomato a vegetable harm vegetables? It doesn't. Doesn't make it true to say it, though.

    What's the plan, Phil? If we push along and the courts quite ironically nullify the legislative gains in various states to legalize it legitimately*, and we get a Roe-esque judicial fiat that does for marriage what Roe did for the dignity and value of human life in the womb for 50 states all at once, we have another permanently balkanizing fracture line in our society.

    *yeah, a big national 14th amendment ruling renders all the efforts to get state legislatures to pass it hollow, empty, and dead -- because it was a fair accompli, the sovereignty over the decision in the political process was always an illusion in such a situation. Slavery's de jure end came by constitutional amendment, as did women's suffrage. The Civil Rights Act by statute. But one court deciding a foundational issue to human civilization for 50 states and 300 million people all at once is an epically terrible idea and will pretty much guarantee permanent social schism on the issue as we have with abortion.
  20. Emmitto
    Offline

    Emmitto VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    5,343
    Likes Received:
    145
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +442
    BTW, I should've been more articulate than to use "baby" about your post. That was bad form. My apologies.

Share This Page