Page 27 of 42 FirstFirst ... 1723242526272829303137 ... LastLast
Results 781 to 810 of 1238

Thread: Marriage Equality Thread

  1. #781
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Married Lesbian Threesome Expects Baby In July

    They plan to have three kids -- one for each of them -- and to homeschool them.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  2. #782
    Smoking pot doesn't hurt anyone but the person who does it.
    Only if said person is not responsible for the care and well being of another person who might suffer due to neglect.

    See this old Dragnet episode:

    http://www.imdb.com/video/hulu/vi242...?ref_=tt_ov_vi
    "It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant

  3. #783
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Married Lesbian Threesome Expects Baby In July

    They plan to have three kids -- one for each of them -- and to homeschool them.
    Isn't that bigamy or polygamy, or whatever?
    "It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant

  4. #784
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Ute View Post
    Married Lesbian Threesome Expects Baby In July

    They plan to have three kids -- one for each of them -- and to homeschool them.
    Homeschooling?! See, that is why these people shouldn't get married and have babies.

  5. #785
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Rocker Ute View Post
    Homeschooling?! See, that is why these people shouldn't get married and have babies.
    Right. Next thing you know they'll become Republicans.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  6. #786
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Mac View Post
    The title of the first article, Freedom to Marry, Freedom to Dissent is not a fair or reasonable title. The title implies some need for a trade-off, gays should get to marry but opponents should be free to disagree. Everyone is already free to disagree, and nobody is threatening to take that freedom away. Not everyone is free to marry. There's not a middle ground to discuss here, one side is simply asking the other side for respect and equality. Gays don't owe the other side anything. If someone was being sentenced to jail or fined for expressing their beliefs against homosexuality, then the articles would be correct in denouncing punishment. But there is no punishment going on. There are people who have lost support or who have been re-buffed or lectured for voicing their disapproval of gay marriage. That's not punishment. That's simply losing support, or getting lectured. The pro-gay marriage crowd should not be expected to support people who actively fight against gay marriage or not raise their voice when someone speaks against gay marriage. That's a ridiculous thing to expect.
    If you are saying that no one has suffered repercussions, post-election, for supporting Prop 8; or that prominent voices in the No on Prop 8 community have not called for retribution against supporters, you have a very weak case. Anyway, I think the goal of the statement I linked to is laudable. In the political arena this is not a battle between good and evil; it's a huge disagreement over an issue of great importance to both sides.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mac View Post
    The idea that gays marrying would somehow have an adverse effect on someone else's marriage or pursuit of happiness is non sequitur and needs to just go away.
    I agree that is a very weak argument and I don't think anyone here is making it. I'm not.
    Last edited by LA Ute; 04-24-2014 at 03:52 PM.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  7. #787
    Educating Cyrus wuapinmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    497
    Just thought I'd point out that I am not affiliated in any way with the username Mac.
    "This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes

  8. #788
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Quote Originally Posted by wuapinmon View Post
    Just thought I'd point out that I am not affiliated in any way with the username Mac.
    That never occurred to me, but now that you mention it I am suspicious. Mainly because I know how sneaky you can be.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  9. #789
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    The argument goes like this: legitimization of a behavior increases the frequency of that behavior. If I think that an increase in the number of gay marriages would be a net negative to the world's happiness, I should oppose it, even if I think it would be a big happiness positive for some individuals.
    Just for clarification, this increase in the number of married gay people would come at the expense of what demographic?
    A) Single gay people
    B) Single asexual people
    C) Married asexual people
    D) Single straight people
    E) Married straight people

    Also, for the demographic(s) which will decline, how do you quantify their current contribution (or lack thereof) to the world's happiness?

  10. #790
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Mac View Post
    I'm saying nobody has been punished for supporting Prop 8, as the articles you linked suggest. Punishment implies that a fine has been levied or someone has been dealt with harshly or injured, or formally penalized. Are you really saying you think people have been punished for supporting Prop 8? I'd like a specific example. The Brendan Ein example the articles gave does not fit the definition of punishment. People didn't support him, he resigned on his own accord. Nobody was obligated to support him as CEO. Yes, people have 'suffered' repercussions for supporting Prop 8. I wouldn't really say 'suffer', but they certainly have had repurcussions. That's far different from being punished.
    We're going to have to agree to disagree. I meant "punished" as a political term, in the sense that people exact some kind of retribution on their opponents whom they have defeated in a political battle. That has happened in the context of Prop 8, and many people have publicly cheered such actions and characterized them as just retribution. It's all over the Internet. I'm also aware of plenty of anecdotal examples. The point is that such acts, although not as serious as fines or imprisonment, etc., do chill civil dialogue and are illiberal. That's the point made in the statement I linked to earlier. I encourage you to read it. the authors are all gay marriage supporters, I think.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  11. #791
    Ostracism is not punishment?
    "It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant

  12. #792
    There was once a member at my history group who took on the self-appointed role of being the arbiter of what he called the "rules of logic." He did not bring civility to the group but, rather, the opposite.
    "It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant

  13. #793
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    This is a time tested law of economics. Making something easier to do leads to an increase in the number of people who do it.
    That is only true if there is a population of people who want to do something but are prevented from doing it due to the difficulty. Do you really believe that there is a large population of people who want to be gay but aren't because saving themselves from marriage is more important than having sex with someone they find attractive?

    Has this conversation ever happened:
    Joe: "Hey Steve, you're hot"
    Steve: "Thanks Joe, you're pretty smokin yourself. Want to go back to my place?"
    Joe: "I so do, but I'm saving myself for marriage. Once the law changes and we can get married, I'd love to get it on. Until then, I might as well just settle down with a female, please her sexually despite my distaste, and raise a family of well adjusted children who never catch on that I'm denying myself true happiness because a ballot referendum was upheld."
    Steve: "Why are the good ones always gays living happy lives as straights in sham marriages?"


    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    Far more people self-identify as gay now than 20 years ago partially because the behavior is more legitimate now.
    First of all, gay is not a behavior. It's a phenomenon of attraction not action. More people who used to be called "confirmed bachelors", "spinsters", "old maids" or "special friends" are now openly gay. That doesn't mean there are more gay people. It's not like the lady you carpool with who lives with her "special friend" was living a hetero life of celibacy until gay marriage was legalized.
    Last edited by jrj84105; 04-24-2014 at 06:58 PM.

  14. #794
    Educating Cyrus wuapinmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    Bob Dylan's "With God on their side" is about how dangerous religion can be when it is only half-understood. I think logic is similar. We all have just enough logical reasoning skills to be dangerous.
    JohnnyLingo isn't here. We'll probably be ok.
    "This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes

  15. #795
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    I said partially. There are many reasons why there are more gay people today than in the past. Like you said, many who would have been closeted gays can now come out with less fear. Others discover/develop attraction to the same sex through exposure or experimentation. Some believe that being gay is 100% hardwired into a person's genotype, which is a convenient but ridiculous belief. Nature/nurture combine to create the attraction. As homosexuality has gained legitimacy, there have been more conditions favorable to the particular nature/nurture combinations that result in same sex attraction.
    Bullshit. The more we learn about "hardwiring", the more we learn that genotype/environment interactions produce ingrained traits such as temperment, gender identification, and sexual orientation very early in development.

    The worst part of your position is that you repeatedly use the term legitimacy or some variant. Your entire stance is based not on marriage rights but specifically on deligitimizing a group of people. Does delegitimizing any group of people, making their lives worse for nothing more than some vague concept of increased goodness in the world defined by your limited code of morality with no basis in observation or demonstrable events, make you a good person or even a good Christian?

  16. #796
    Educating Cyrus wuapinmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    497
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    I said partially. There are many reasons why there are more gay people today than in the past. Like you said, many who would have been closeted gays can now come out with less fear. Others discover/develop attraction to the same sex through exposure or experimentation. Some believe that being gay is 100% hardwired into a person's genotype, which is a convenient but ridiculous belief. Nature/nurture combine to create the attraction. As homosexuality has gained legitimacy, there have been more conditions favorable to the particular nature/nurture combinations that result in same sex attraction.
    I think time and science will prove most of your beliefs incorrect.

    The average gay person was born that way, I believe, a belief that I do not find ridiculous. I never chose to be straight. I just remember Susan Granger's hands were really super soft one day in 5th grade, and that was that. No one nurtured my heterosexuality. I don't believe that you could've taken the gay men I know, have shown them lots of glamour porn in their pubescence and made them straight. How exactly does one nurture heterosexuality?

    I also don't accept that there are 'more gay people today than in the past.' People are willing to come out now since the former stigma is diminishing. Much like extramarital sex, it was always there, but it used to be more hidden.

    There are certainly some nurture situations. Prisoners certainly are example.....but, they don't consider themselves gay, usually. Perhaps some Svengalis have nurtured naive boys into homosexual relationships. But, by and large, I believe that gay people are gay due to innate things in their bodies, things beyond their control. Denying them the right to marry and find lasting happiness in their sexual attraction is to deny them the ability to find gratification in one of the absolutely fundamental parts of humanity.
    "This culture doesn't sell modesty. It sells "I am more modest than you" modesty." -- Two Utes

  17. #797
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  18. #798
    In the age old nature vs nurture debate, generally speaking, I have found that it is usually a mixture of both. That's certainly the case in my own life.
    "It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant

  19. #799
    I just remember Susan Granger's hands were really super soft one day in 5th grade, and that was that.
    I had my first crush in the first grade, because the girl I liked had long brown hair.
    "It'd be nice to please everyone but I thought it would be more interesting to have a point of view." -- Oscar Levant

  20. #800
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    I am more skeptical of the power of social science than you are. These questions cannot be tested well.
    I don't think that social science will show this as much as genetic research will (like jrj84105 mentioned). I do however think that there will always be a nature vs nurture debate about human behavior. But really, should it even matter whether people are gay because of nature or nurture? It is the way they are.

    The genetic angle is really interesting to me, though. I have a sibling with down syndrome. With the sophistication of in utero indicators, the down syndrome population is shrinking. Can you imagine if there was a way to genetically determine the likelyhood that a fetus would be born gay? It makes me cringe to think of the implications.

    Morality/ethics of society is an ever-changing landscape and that change is being accelerated by technology. I worry whether mankind can keep up.

  21. #801
    Sam the Sheepdog LA Ute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, California
    Posts
    17,726
    Quote Originally Posted by wally View Post
    But really, should it even matter whether people are gay because of nature or nurture? It is the way they are.
    I think you are right. Many people think the genetic explanation is important because of the immutability argument, i.e., being gay is like being of a particular race.

    This subject makes me sad and frustrated.

    "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
    --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

    "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
    --Yeats

    “True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”

    --John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell

  22. #802
    Quote Originally Posted by wally View Post
    The genetic angle is really interesting to me, though. I have a sibling with down syndrome. With the sophistication of in utero indicators, the down syndrome population is shrinking. Can you imagine if there was a way to genetically determine the likelyhood that a fetus would be born gay? It makes me cringe to think of the implications.

    Morality/ethics of society is an ever-changing landscape and that change is being accelerated by technology. I worry whether mankind can keep up.
    Reminds me of the movie Gattaca.

  23. #803
    Quote Originally Posted by sancho View Post
    It started as one of two examples to argue that all issues are moral issues. That was the case I actually cared more about. I always get bothered when people say you can't/shouldn't legislate morality. All the laws/legislation are reflections of people's moral values.
    There are some smart philosophers here who know these things, but distinctions between morality, ethics, and ideology are pretty tenuous. I still think morality more strongly connotes a value judgement of goodness versus evil within a specific belief system. When all policy is derived from morality, and therefore derived from specific belief systems, it turns a policy debate into a debate about whose belief system is more correct. If a person frames a policy debate strictly in terms of morality, then that person opens up his her morality and belief system to criticism, or more correctly being shit upon. That's not generally productive and is why one might try, when considering policies that apply to people both inside and outside his/her belief system, to form opinions that are not exclusively defined by his/her personal moral code.
    Last edited by jrj84105; 04-25-2014 at 03:23 PM.

  24. #804
    Quote Originally Posted by wally View Post
    I don't think that social science will show this as much as genetic research will (like jrj84105 mentioned). I do however think that there will always be a nature vs nurture debate about human behavior. But really, should it even matter whether people are gay because of nature or nurture? It is the way they are.

    The genetic angle is really interesting to me, though. I have a sibling with down syndrome. With the sophistication of in utero indicators, the down syndrome population is shrinking. Can you imagine if there was a way to genetically determine the likelyhood that a fetus would be born gay? It makes me cringe to think of the implications.

    Morality/ethics of society is an ever-changing landscape and that change is being accelerated by technology. I worry whether mankind can keep up.
    The impact of hearing restoration on the deaf community is striking in this sense.

  25. #805
    Quote Originally Posted by Mac View Post
    I would argue that the Mozilla CEO's support for Prop 8 is every bit as offensive as Sterling's private phone call to his girlfriend.
    This journalist disagrees with you: Sterling vs. Eich

  26. #806
    sounds like the 4th Circuit arguments went about like the 10th. From the questioning, one judge on each side, and the third mostly silent and inscrutable.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...y.html?hpid=z1

  27. #807
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    sounds like the 4th Circuit arguments went about like the 10th. From the questioning, one judge on each side, and the third mostly silent and inscrutable.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...y.html?hpid=z1
    Thanks for the update. Judge Niemeyer is a solidly conservative judge, I don't know much about the other two. I presume the 10th will issue their opinion first, but the fourth has a better reputation, so it's opinion might carry more weight.

    who is next? Fifth?

  28. #808
    Quote Originally Posted by Applejack View Post
    Thanks for the update. Judge Niemeyer is a solidly conservative judge, I don't know much about the other two. I presume the 10th will issue their opinion first, but the fourth has a better reputation, so it's opinion might carry more weight.

    who is next? Fifth?
    I clerked in the Fourth Circuit years and years ago. It was really conservative then (although my judge wasn't.) Dont know any of the current judges, excdpt JHWIII by reputation. Sounds like the Circuit has become more moderate than it was then.

    Fifth Sixth or Ninth could be next; not sure.

  29. #809
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned View Post
    I clerked in the Fourth Circuit years and years ago. It was really conservative then (although my judge wasn't.) Dont know any of the current judges, excdpt JHWIII by reputation. Sounds like the Circuit has become more moderate than it was then.

    Fifth Sixth or Ninth could be next; not sure.
    Who did you clerk for, if you don't mind me asking?

    Idaho now has gay marriage! Surprisingly, the decision came from a magistrate judge.

  30. #810
    Quote Originally Posted by Applejack View Post
    Who did you clerk for, if you don't mind me asking?

    Idaho now has gay marriage! Surprisingly, the decision came from a magistrate judge.
    Frank Murnaghan, in Baltimore. I just looked on the website and realized Andre Davis is now a fourth circuit judge. He clerked for Murnaghan the year ahead of me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •