JUST IN--- Massachusett's high court-------

Chat about anything and everything... (well almost anything) Whether it be the front porch or the pot belly stove or news of interest or a topic of your liking, this is the place to post it.

Moderator: S2k Moderators

Message
Author
User avatar
bfez1
S2K Supporter
S2K Supporter
Posts: 6548
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:14 am
Location: Meraux--10 mi E of New Orleans-totally destroyed by Katrina
Contact:

JUST IN--- Massachusett's high court-------

#1 Postby bfez1 » Wed Feb 04, 2004 11:51 am

Massachusett's high court ruled Wednesday that gay couples have right to marriage - Justices say law only allowing civil unions would be unconstitutional
Justices say law only allowing civil unions would be unconstitutional
0 likes   

User avatar
mf_dolphin
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 17758
Age: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 2:05 pm
Location: St Petersburg, FL
Contact:

#2 Postby mf_dolphin » Wed Feb 04, 2004 12:34 pm

This is just one more case of a liberal court writting laws. I hope the state and federal legislators will push through the constitutional ammendments that will overturn this ruling.
0 likes   

GalvestonDuck
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 15941
Age: 57
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2002 8:11 am
Location: Galveston, oh Galveston (And yeah, it's a barrier island. Wanna make something of it?)

#3 Postby GalvestonDuck » Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:17 pm

Yay! I don't have to tickle Bonnie! :wink:
0 likes   

rainstorm

#4 Postby rainstorm » Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:43 pm

if bush were smart, he would get fully behind a constitutional amendment to preserve marriage
0 likes   

WidreMann

#5 Postby WidreMann » Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:46 pm

How does allowing gays to marry destroy marriage? And certainly homosexuality is the least of the problems facing marriage, if it even is one in the first place. Divorce rates are very high, there is still a lot of domestic violence, unwed mothers, etc. How about the right focus on fixing these issues first before going after people who are probably going to have much better success rates with marriage than heterosexuals.
0 likes   

OtherHD
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2192
Age: 39
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 10:01 am
Location: San Antonio, TX

#6 Postby OtherHD » Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:51 pm

*Sigh*

We've down this road many times before. All I will say is that if Bush proposes a Constitutional amendment "preserving marriage" (read: denying rights to a group of people based on the way they were born), then I will fully expect it to include outlawing divorces and 2am spur of the moment weddings in Las Vegas.
0 likes   

User avatar
j
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4382
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 1:21 pm

#7 Postby j » Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:59 pm

looks like I got the heck out of Massachusetts just in time. They'll be dancing in the streets over this one.
0 likes   

User avatar
mf_dolphin
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 17758
Age: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 2:05 pm
Location: St Petersburg, FL
Contact:

#8 Postby mf_dolphin » Wed Feb 04, 2004 3:39 pm

WidreMann wrote:How does allowing gays to marry destroy marriage? And certainly homosexuality is the least of the problems facing marriage, if it even is one in the first place. Divorce rates are very high, there is still a lot of domestic violence, unwed mothers, etc. How about the right focus on fixing these issues first before going after people who are probably going to have much better success rates with marriage than heterosexuals.


The vast majority og the nation sees marriage as a religous covenant. The fact the the law also adopted the same word is immaterial to most. The state has no right to attempt to redefine a religous institution. IMO I support the legal union of gays but stay away from marriage. That has been and should stay the description of a union between man and wife.


What this court proves with the latest ruling is that equality under the law is not sufficient. It's an attack on an age old institution nothing less.
0 likes   

User avatar
stormchazer
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2462
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Lakeland, Florida
Contact:

#9 Postby stormchazer » Wed Feb 04, 2004 3:47 pm

It is my firm belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. It is specific for the men in woman as it is a bound built not just out of love, but for the purpose of procreation. Like it or not, it is a moral bond for the purpose of developing the family unit. You may pretend otherwise, but procreation is the basis of the family unit and with same-sex marriage, this procreation is just not possible.

How does allowing gays to marry destroy marriage? And certainly homosexuality is the least of the problems facing marriage, if it even is one in the first place. Divorce rates are very high, there is still a lot of domestic violence, unwed mothers, etc. How about the right focus on fixing these issues first before going after people who are probably going to have much better success rates with marriage than heterosexuals.


Using this logic, why do homosexuals demand they be allowed to marry. Civil Unions, which I have and would support, would give all the same legal rights. I submit that divorce rates are so high, and unwed mothers so prevalent, because we have lowered our standards so low, that everyone has an excuse to be a victim and/or be selfish. Today, the homosexual couple is the victim and they demand the right to be married to fulfill their personal agenda. The hell with the family unit, procreation or children, we demand to be like everyone else and we want our marriage.

Same sex couples are not like heterosexual couples because of the question of procreation. We cannot create an artificial depiction of marriage just to include a group with a different lifestyle any more then we can ask a man to give birth. It just is not what marriage is.
0 likes   
The posts or stuff said are NOT an official forecast and my opinion alone. Please look to the NHC and NWS for official forecasts and products.

Model Runs Cheat Sheet:
GFS (5:30 AM/PM, 11:30 AM/PM)
HWRF, GFDL, UKMET, NAVGEM (6:30-8:00 AM/PM, 12:30-2:00 AM/PM)
ECMWF (1:45 AM/PM)
TCVN is a weighted averaged

Opinions my own.

WidreMann

#10 Postby WidreMann » Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:51 pm

I still fail to see why anybody cares whether gays get married or not. The real problem, and I know it, is homophobia. And whether you guys will admit it or not, that's what is underlying this movement to ban gay marriage. Because in reality, it just doesn't matter.
0 likes   

stormraiser
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 3453
Age: 55
Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2002 4:11 pm
Location: Southern Maryland
Contact:

#11 Postby stormraiser » Wed Feb 04, 2004 5:02 pm

I think homophobia is a misnomer. I don't think a lot of people who disagree with the "gay" lifestyle are afraid of them. But for someone to say they disagree with it and be labeled a homophobe almost means that people like you are heterophobes? This isn't against those of you who may be gay, and I know it wouldn't be taken that way. But I don't understand the thinking that if you agree with me, you are enlightened, but if you disagree with me, you are closed-minded and homophobic? Where is the freedom to believe what I want to believe?
0 likes   

User avatar
stormchazer
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2462
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Lakeland, Florida
Contact:

#12 Postby stormchazer » Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:10 pm

WidreMann wrote:I still fail to see why anybody cares whether gays get married or not. The real problem, and I know it, is homophobia. And whether you guys will admit it or not, that's what is underlying this movement to ban gay marriage. Because in reality, it just doesn't matter.


If it doesn't matter....why the lawsuit? You just enforced my point. "I'm gay, I'm a minority, the world owes me! I demand you change the rules for me." Its not just this. Its the FCAT, its blacks, its whites, its immigrants, its atheist, its christians, its muslims.....and on and on.
0 likes   
The posts or stuff said are NOT an official forecast and my opinion alone. Please look to the NHC and NWS for official forecasts and products.

Model Runs Cheat Sheet:
GFS (5:30 AM/PM, 11:30 AM/PM)
HWRF, GFDL, UKMET, NAVGEM (6:30-8:00 AM/PM, 12:30-2:00 AM/PM)
ECMWF (1:45 AM/PM)
TCVN is a weighted averaged

Opinions my own.

User avatar
Lindaloo
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 22658
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 10:06 am
Location: Pascagoula, MS

#13 Postby Lindaloo » Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:39 pm

Great post Jara!! I agree 100%.
0 likes   

User avatar
JQ Public
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 4488
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Cary, NC

#14 Postby JQ Public » Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:48 pm

I still think its weird that Dick Cheney's daughter is a lesbian, but him and his administration are not for gay marriage?! What is more honorable...supporting an idea that would let ones own daughter be happy and get married or not standing by your own daughter by not supporting her right to marry? I am not surprised that the invisible VP isn't more in the spotlight on gay rights issues! Once again what is more honorable standing by your family or not letting gays marry? What would impact your life more? :roll: :roll:
0 likes   

User avatar
mf_dolphin
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 17758
Age: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 2:05 pm
Location: St Petersburg, FL
Contact:

#15 Postby mf_dolphin » Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:50 pm

WidreMann wrote:I still fail to see why anybody cares whether gays get married or not. The real problem, and I know it, is homophobia. And whether you guys will admit it or not, that's what is underlying this movement to ban gay marriage. Because in reality, it just doesn't matter.


The reason most of us care is that we see marriage as a holy union not a legal one. When the courts dictate religon I have a big problem I couldn't disagree more on your assestment of opponents being homophobic, that's just a simplistic analysis of a complex problem. IMO I have a lot of close personal friends who are gay, many of which are in loving committed relationships. I support legal gay unions but not gay marriage.
0 likes   

WidreMann

#16 Postby WidreMann » Wed Feb 04, 2004 7:25 pm

I'm gay, I'm a minority, the world owes me! I demand you change the rules for me.
Well given that they've been ostracized for most of human history, don't you think the least we can do is give them the same rights everyone else gets? I thought that was what this country was about?

As far as the holy union thing, that's fine for your religion, but not every Christian group agrees and neither do parts of some other religions. If the government banned gay marriage, then they would be picking one particular set of religious practices over another. It's not the government's place to step in and ban this, regardless of what your religion says.
0 likes   

rainstorm

#17 Postby rainstorm » Wed Feb 04, 2004 7:28 pm

OtherHD wrote:*Sigh*

We've down this road many times before. All I will say is that if Bush proposes a Constitutional amendment "preserving marriage" (read: denying rights to a group of people based on the way they were born), then I will fully expect it to include outlawing divorces and 2am spur of the moment weddings in Las Vegas.


marriage isnt a "right". it IS foundation of a stable society
0 likes   

rainstorm

#18 Postby rainstorm » Wed Feb 04, 2004 7:30 pm

as i said, this would be a great issue if bush would get behind it.
0 likes   

User avatar
mf_dolphin
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 17758
Age: 68
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 2:05 pm
Location: St Petersburg, FL
Contact:

#19 Postby mf_dolphin » Wed Feb 04, 2004 7:49 pm

[quote="WidreMann]As far as the holy union thing, that's fine for your religion, but not every Christian group agrees and neither do parts of some other religions. If the government banned gay marriage, then they would be picking one particular set of religious practices over another. It's not the government's place to step in and ban this, regardless of what your religion says.[/quote]

What you're not acknowledging is that this is a country where the laws are supposed to be based on the majority. That's what this country was founded on. I defy you to find a majority. It's not the court's job to legislate from the bench....
0 likes   

OtherHD
Category 5
Category 5
Posts: 2192
Age: 39
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2002 10:01 am
Location: San Antonio, TX

#20 Postby OtherHD » Wed Feb 04, 2004 7:50 pm

rainstorm wrote:marriage isnt a "right". it IS foundation of a stable society


I see you ignored the main point of my post. That's okay. I didn't expect you to refute it anyway. My point, in case you missed it: If you want to protect marriage, ban divorces and annulments. How is divorce any less of an affront to such a holy institution as allowing gays to marry?
0 likes   


Return to “Off Topic”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 20 guests