CDZ Why Not Let States Decide?

[TemplarKormac]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

So as along as gay hate crimes committed by the nutter phobes don't include throwing them off roofs, they should just be content with not having equal rights to marriage.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

This fails as both a false comparison fallacy and red herring fallacy.

What crimes might be committed against gays in other countries has no bearing whatsoever concerning the treatment of gay Americans in the United States, nor does it justify denying gay Americans their civil rights, nor does it mitigate gay Americans being disadvantaged by government in violation of the Constitution.

It's understood that you and others on the social right want gay Americans to 'go back into the closet,' but that's not going to happen, and rightfully so.

 

[RKMBrown]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

Yes, I see people like you doing that. Do you go around bashing gays over the head every day, or do you just hide behind your keyboard to do it?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

Yes, I see people like you doing that. Do you go around bashing gays over the head every day, or do you just hide behind your keyboard to do it?

Do you see me/us killing them because they are gay? What makes you sincerely believe I am so hostile that I would resort to violence against them? What I say via the written word is free speech. So I kindly ask that you pipe down.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

This fails as both a false comparison fallacy and red herring fallacy.

What crimes might be committed against gays in other countries has no bearing whatsoever concerning the treatment of gay Americans in the United States, nor does it justify denying gay Americans their civil rights, nor does it mitigate gay Americans being disadvantaged by government in violation of the Constitution.

It's understood that you and others on the social right want gay Americans to 'go back into the closet,' but that's not going to happen, and rightfully so.

Those other countries don't have that pesky constitution to contend with.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

Yes, I see people like you doing that. Do you go around bashing gays over the head every day, or do you just hide behind your keyboard to do it?

Are you even reading my posts? Do you see any Christian death squads roving the streets singling out gay people and murdering them?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

people ARE free to move to states where they feel better about living, ya know.

People who don't want to abide by the US Constitution are more than free to move to other countries.

 

[Flopper]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

Instead of asking why states should not be Peeping Toms, how about you ask why they should?

Yup, repubs are in our bedrooms and dems are in our wallets. What to do? What to do?

Take the Republican Party back from the social conservatives - who are just as much in your wallet as the Democrats.

Most social conservatives support free markets and small government but their stand on homosexuality and abortion sets them at odds not just with liberals but also fiscal conservatives.

I disagree. Most social conservatives have no idea what a free market is and they are sure not for small government. It far more than just homosexuality and abortion. Social conservatives want the imposition of some mythical 1950's sitcom and if you are willing to promise them that, they will go along with just about any other program you like.

When I say support free markets and small government, I mean they go alone with fiscal conservatives because if they don't the only other voting option is democrats which would be unthinkable. You're right about turning back the clock. I've never met a social conservative yet that didn't yearn for the good old days which of course were never that good and for the most never even existed.

 

[SAYIT]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

So you are a states-right liberal? That makes you a unique puppy. The federal minimum wage law is exactly the same kind of intrusion you describe. It's a state and local issue in which Washington has no biz.

 

[Publius1787]

We have many contentious issues (e.g., abortion and gay marriage) for which there is no consensus. Why must they all be decided at the Federal level? Why not let States decide for themselves? Please leave out the moral arguments on both sides; there are just as many people who come to opposite conclusions. Also, the 13th and 14th Amendments specifically dealt with the end of slavery and the civil war, so don't bother with applying them to current issues.

I just want to know why you think the States shouldn't be allowed to decide these issues on their own.

Liberals hate the idea of letting states decide anything because people have the ability to move. This thwarts their ideological inclinations as those who object to their ruinous policies have a say when it comes to voting with their feet. If they can force all states to abide by their will there is little else for people to run to and they are forced to subject themselves to liberal policies that they cant run away from. Thus, democrats are the exact opposite of the root word in their name.

 

[RKMBrown]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

Yes, I see people like you doing that. Do you go around bashing gays over the head every day, or do you just hide behind your keyboard to do it?

Do you see me/us killing them because they are gay? What makes you sincerely believe I am so hostile that I would resort to violence against them? What I say via the written word is free speech. So I kindly ask that you pipe down.

So that would be a yes you just take their rights away from a safe distance.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

Yes, I see people like you doing that. Do you go around bashing gays over the head every day, or do you just hide behind your keyboard to do it?

Do you see me/us killing them because they are gay? What makes you sincerely believe I am so hostile that I would resort to violence against them? What I say via the written word is free speech. So I kindly ask that you pipe down.

So that would be a yes you just take their rights away from a safe distance.

That would be you putting words in my mouth.

People like you are so trigger happy, "oh I got you this time, my pretty!" Sorry to burst your bubble, but I made clear a few months ago I am for gay rights. But how they get those rights are at the expense of those with religiously held beliefs, being religious as I am, I have to stand for my own brethren, too. If you want anyone else jumping on board, you'll have to do better than "you hate them and want to strip them of their rights! You want them to die!"

Seriously, is that all you can come up with?

No, I smiled when Ireland voted to allow gay marriage. That's how it should be done. Nobody forcing anyone to do anything. Not so here. When people voted in the opposite, they are those who "just" want to take the rights of gay people away. Instead, they have their collective wills overridden by their government. What good is voting for anything if your vote is trumped by your own government? It would be like your government telling you what guy to vote for for president, even after you voted for the other guy.

Surely you are ignorant of what rights gays do have here as opposed to elsewhere.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

So you are a states-right liberal? That makes you a unique puppy. The federal minimum wage law is exactly the same kind of intrusion you describe. It's a state and local issue in which Washington has no biz.

So called "states rights" as it is today, is ridiculous.

The bottom line to this is that no religion and no government, at any level, should have a say in who consenting adults choose to marry.

Minimum wage has nothing at all to do with that issue. Please don't try to derail the thread with such an enormous reach.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Taking away a persons rights, treating them like they are sub-human, is a gut punch, a punch to the brain. I'm pretty sure you understand exactly what you are doing to them. How's it feel to be so high and mighty so "christian" like?

What rights do they not have that we don't have? To marry? Please. If you want to see what real deprivation of rights looks like, look overseas. Look at all the gay people there who are being treated like animals and slaughtered by radical Islamists. No gay person in America has to face that kind of danger. Gays can make money, own property, speak freely, act freely, do whatever it is they want without being marked for death by extremists. Do you see any Christians doing that?

Yes, I see people like you doing that. Do you go around bashing gays over the head every day, or do you just hide behind your keyboard to do it?

Do you see me/us killing them because they are gay? What makes you sincerely believe I am so hostile that I would resort to violence against them? What I say via the written word is free speech. So I kindly ask that you pipe down.

So that would be a yes you just take their rights away from a safe distance.

Exactly.

That "safe distance" really means that religion should have control (sharia law) over sexuality but not the opposite.

These people think the First Amendment should protect their particular choice of religion but no one elses.

 

[Votto]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

Instead of asking why states should not be Peeping Toms, how about you ask why they should?

Right, government should have no interest who we marry, so why have state sponsored marriage?

Oh, that's right, you support the government peeping into your gay bedroom and giving the thumbs up sign as where the polygamist in Utah is just a sicko in their eyes.

 

[JFK_USA]

Because people constitutional rights are not up for a popular vote. They are automatically protected.

 

[SAYIT]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

So you are a states-right liberal? That makes you a unique puppy. The federal minimum wage law is exactly the same kind of intrusion you describe. It's a state and local issue in which Washington has no biz.

So called "states rights" as it is today, is ridiculous.

The bottom line to this is that no religion and no government, at any level, should have a say in who consenting adults choose to marry.

Minimum wage has nothing at all to do with that issue. Please don't try to derail the thread with such an enormous reach.

So you are only for states rights when it impacts a subject you find appropriate. That's very liberal of you.
The name of the thread is "Why Not Let States Decide" and I believe there's a long list of issues which are none of Washington's biz (including marriage). Any state law that does not conflict with the Constitution and does not represent a tyranny of the majority should be the law of that state.

 

[Flopper]

Big Government right wingers want lots and lots of invasive laws. They don't get that government does not belong in our private lives. Not in our bedrooms, not in control of our most personal and private issues.

So you are a states-right liberal? That makes you a unique puppy. The federal minimum wage law is exactly the same kind of intrusion you describe. It's a state and local issue in which Washington has no biz.

So called "states rights" as it is today, is ridiculous.

The bottom line to this is that no religion and no government, at any level, should have a say in who consenting adults choose to marry.

Minimum wage has nothing at all to do with that issue. Please don't try to derail the thread with such an enormous reach.

States Rights began a slow death the day it was written into the constitution. As nationalism grew states right shrank.

In colonial times people identified themselves strongly with their state but not today. In 1900, 80% of the population lived in the state they were born. Today it's approximately 50%. If asked to identify yourself, you're most likely to say you're an American, not a Floridian, Virginian, or Californian. Whether it's true are not, people think the actions of the president and congress are more important than that of their governor or legislature. On this board, the reference to the government is taken to mean the federal government. We may not like it, but in this environment the states rights will always come in a poor second.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

TEMPLARKORMAC SAID:

“No, I smiled when Ireland voted to allow gay marriage. That's how it should be done.”

Incorrect.

That is not 'how it's done' in the United States, which is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy, where the people are subject to the rule of law, not men, as men are incapable of ruling justly – measures denying same-sex couples access to marriage law in violation of the 14th Amendment are proof of that.

TEMPLARKORMAC SAID:

“Not so here. When people voted in the opposite, they are those who "just" want to take the rights of gay people away. Instead, they have their collective wills overridden by their government. What good is voting for anything if your vote is trumped by your own government?”

Wrong.

The residents of a given state have no authority to deny American citizens residing in that state their Constitutional rights, in this case the right to equal protection of the law.

Consequently, the 'will of the people' was not 'overridden by government'; rather, the people erred and acted in a manner repugnant to the Constitution, where the courts appropriately and in concert with the Constitution and its case law invalidated those measures seeking to deny gay Americans their rights protected by the 14th Amendment.