What's new

Another Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down DOMA

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
93,067
Reaction score
14,782
Points
2,180
New York appeals court strikes down DOMA - CNN.com

The long and the short of their decision is that DOMA violates the 14th amendment, which is exactly correct. DOMA is unequal protection of the laws, granting special privileges to opposite-sex couples and withholding them from same-sex couples.

A same-sex married couple cannot file a federal married tax return, nor can a same-sex spouse collect Social Security death benefits, nor can they exercise a myriad of other privileges extended to opposite-sex couples.

So, either remove the marriage privileges that are currently granted only to opposite-sex couples, or grant them to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike.

There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting the privilege of a married tax return to same-sex couples. There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting Social Security death benefits to same-sex couples.

No societal harm arises from these activities.
.
 
Last edited:

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,471
Points
1,830
That's why it has to be decided in the Supreme Court. We have a nation in decline and decay, I expect DOMA to be struck down by the Supreme Court, we are simply becoming too degenerate to survive.
 
OP
g5000

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
93,067
Reaction score
14,782
Points
2,180
That's why it has to be decided in the Supreme Court. We have a nation in decline and decay, I expect DOMA to be struck down by the Supreme Court, we are simply becoming too degenerate to survive.
Can you explain how two adults in a monogamous relationship filing a married tax return is degenerate?

.
 

Dissent

Rookie
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
3,131
Reaction score
213
Points
0
Location
FEMA region 4
Aka government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong AGAIN....government has no business in marriage...its a contract between people that's all...no need for government to enforce people's beliefs in what marriage is based on some book of fiction.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
49,760
Reaction score
7,179
Points
1,840
New York appeals court strikes down DOMA - CNN.com

The long and the short of their decision is that DOMA violates the 14th amendment, which is exactly correct. DOMA is unequal protection of the laws, granting special privileges to opposite-sex couples and withholding them from same-sex couples.

A same-sex married couple cannot file a federal married tax return, nor can a same-sex spouse collect Social Security death benefits, nor can they exercise a myriad of other privileges extended to opposite-sex couples.

So, either remove the marriage privileges that are currently granted only to opposite-sex couples, or grant them to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike.

There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting the privilege of a married tax return to same-sex couples. There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting Social Security death benefits to same-sex couples.

No societal harm arises from these activities.
.
There is nothing preventing them from marrying someone of the opposite sex, so how has equal protection been denied?

Marriage has always been a contract between a man and a woman, or hell, a man and several women.

Even if you get by on the equal protection route, You can give same sex couples the same rights in another contract recognized by the state, and equal protection can be met.

I am denied the right to marry someone because I havent found someone dumb enough to marry me yet, Are my rights under equal protection denied?
 

sfcalifornia

Silver Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
2,276
Reaction score
508
Points
98
Aka government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong AGAIN....government has no business in marriage...its a contract between people that's all...no need for government to enforce people's beliefs in what marriage is based on some book of fiction.
You are completely ignoring the fact that a contract carries legal issues which must be resolved by government. As long as people keep breaking those contracts through divorce and upon their deaths, government will be involved. Striking down DOMA has nothing to do with enforcing people's beliefs. This has to do with enforcing the law.
 
OP
g5000

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
93,067
Reaction score
14,782
Points
2,180
New York appeals court strikes down DOMA - CNN.com

The long and the short of their decision is that DOMA violates the 14th amendment, which is exactly correct. DOMA is unequal protection of the laws, granting special privileges to opposite-sex couples and withholding them from same-sex couples.

A same-sex married couple cannot file a federal married tax return, nor can a same-sex spouse collect Social Security death benefits, nor can they exercise a myriad of other privileges extended to opposite-sex couples.

So, either remove the marriage privileges that are currently granted only to opposite-sex couples, or grant them to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike.

There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting the privilege of a married tax return to same-sex couples. There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting Social Security death benefits to same-sex couples.

No societal harm arises from these activities.
.
There is nothing preventing them from marrying someone of the opposite sex, so how has equal protection been denied?
Once again...slowly...the law...grants the privilege of a married tax return to...opposite-sex couples... by law. That is the key part. The law. "Equal protection of the laws". That the law denies a married tax return to...same-sex couples...means same-sex couples...do not have equal protection of that law.

Marriage has always been a contract between a man and a woman, or hell, a man and several women.

Even if you get by on the equal protection route, You can give same sex couples the same rights in another contract recognized by the state, and equal protection can be met.
That is all they are asking for! Right now, DOMA denies the recognition of a same-sex couple's marriage contract.

That is why DOMA has been struck down.



I am denied the right to marry someone because I havent found someone dumb enough to marry me yet, Are my rights under equal protection denied?
The law is not denying you marriage or the privilege of filing a married tax return if you marry someone of the opposite sex.

This should be blindingly obvious.


.
 
Last edited:

Ravi

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
90,898
Reaction score
13,978
Points
2,205
Location
Hating Hatters
New York appeals court strikes down DOMA - CNN.com

The long and the short of their decision is that DOMA violates the 14th amendment, which is exactly correct. DOMA is unequal protection of the laws, granting special privileges to opposite-sex couples and withholding them from same-sex couples.

A same-sex married couple cannot file a federal married tax return, nor can a same-sex spouse collect Social Security death benefits, nor can they exercise a myriad of other privileges extended to opposite-sex couples.

So, either remove the marriage privileges that are currently granted only to opposite-sex couples, or grant them to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike.

There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting the privilege of a married tax return to same-sex couples. There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting Social Security death benefits to same-sex couples.

No societal harm arises from these activities.
.
This is excellent news.
 

Seawytch

Information isnt Advocacy
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
38,753
Reaction score
5,297
Points
1,160
Location
Peaking out from the redwoods
Let's not forget...keeping this political and all, that the House spent over a million dollars so far defending it. $1.5 to be exact.
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
137,161
Reaction score
15,397
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
New York appeals court strikes down DOMA - CNN.com

The long and the short of their decision is that DOMA violates the 14th amendment, which is exactly correct. DOMA is unequal protection of the laws, granting special privileges to opposite-sex couples and withholding them from same-sex couples.

A same-sex married couple cannot file a federal married tax return, nor can a same-sex spouse collect Social Security death benefits, nor can they exercise a myriad of other privileges extended to opposite-sex couples.

So, either remove the marriage privileges that are currently granted only to opposite-sex couples, or grant them to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike.

There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting the privilege of a married tax return to same-sex couples. There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting Social Security death benefits to same-sex couples.

No societal harm arises from these activities.
.
:eusa_clap::eusa_clap::eusa_clap:
 

Dissent

Rookie
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
3,131
Reaction score
213
Points
0
Location
FEMA region 4
Aka government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong AGAIN....government has no business in marriage...its a contract between people that's all...no need for government to enforce people's beliefs in what marriage is based on some book of fiction.
You are completely ignoring the fact that a contract carries legal issues which must be resolved by government. As long as people keep breaking those contracts through divorce and upon their deaths, government will be involved. Striking down DOMA has nothing to do with enforcing people's beliefs. This has to do with enforcing the law.
That is the only time the government needs to be involved is when a contract is to be dismissed and or it needs to be enforced...I think that's to much power as well...why does it matter to the government if 2 guys or 2 women get married!? They are being pushed by the religious right into this...it needs to just let things lay as they are...leave it alone.
 

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,471
Points
1,830
Then the law would prohibit monogamous brothers and sisters from benefiting from the law, or fathers and daughters. Or, people who voluntarily want to be in marriages of multiples. Why shouldn't five women get tax filing benefits or death benefits if they all want to be married to the same man. It's love. Warren Jeffs didn't do anything wrong. Why is he in prison? He just loved more than one woman and took more than one woman to wife.

Even so, mainstreaming homosexual marriages into legality would not come close to causing the kind of damage that it will without the ability to punish people who do not accept that legality. Legalize same sex marriage as far as government benefits go, but allow the wedding cake baker, the photographer, the relationship counselor to say no. Allow schools the power to send homosexual children home and by all means, permit the Boy Scouts to tell the newly outed scout that he doesn't get the Eagle badge.

Then you have an argument that this is only about federal rights.
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
137,161
Reaction score
15,397
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
Aka government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong AGAIN....government has no business in marriage...its a contract between people that's all...no need for government to enforce people's beliefs in what marriage is based on some book of fiction.
So...what have YOU actively done to push for the elimination of civil marriage?
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
137,161
Reaction score
15,397
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
New York appeals court strikes down DOMA - CNN.com

The long and the short of their decision is that DOMA violates the 14th amendment, which is exactly correct. DOMA is unequal protection of the laws, granting special privileges to opposite-sex couples and withholding them from same-sex couples.

A same-sex married couple cannot file a federal married tax return, nor can a same-sex spouse collect Social Security death benefits, nor can they exercise a myriad of other privileges extended to opposite-sex couples.

So, either remove the marriage privileges that are currently granted only to opposite-sex couples, or grant them to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike.

There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting the privilege of a married tax return to same-sex couples. There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting Social Security death benefits to same-sex couples.

No societal harm arises from these activities.
.
There is nothing preventing them from marrying someone of the opposite sex, so how has equal protection been denied?

Marriage has always been a contract between a man and a woman, or hell, a man and several women.

Even if you get by on the equal protection route, You can give same sex couples the same rights in another contract recognized by the state, and equal protection can be met.

I am denied the right to marry someone because I havent found someone dumb enough to marry me yet, Are my rights under equal protection denied?
So...tell us. How does being married to someone you are not physically attracted to....work for you?
 

sfcalifornia

Silver Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
2,276
Reaction score
508
Points
98
Aka government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong AGAIN....government has no business in marriage...its a contract between people that's all...no need for government to enforce people's beliefs in what marriage is based on some book of fiction.
You are completely ignoring the fact that a contract carries legal issues which must be resolved by government. As long as people keep breaking those contracts through divorce and upon their deaths, government will be involved. Striking down DOMA has nothing to do with enforcing people's beliefs. This has to do with enforcing the law.
That is the only time the government needs to be involved is when a contract is to be dismissed and or it needs to be enforced...I think that's to much power as well...why does it matter to the government if 2 guys or 2 women get married!? They are being pushed by the religious right into this...it needs to just let things lay as they are...leave it alone.
Again you are missing the point. The government is concerned with the financial and custodial issues if marriage (children, power of attorney etc.). Same-sex couples are seeking equality with regards to THOSE issues. Religion has nothing to do with this fight.
 
OP
g5000

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
93,067
Reaction score
14,782
Points
2,180
Then the law would prohibit monogamous brothers and sisters from benefiting from the law, or fathers and daughters. Or, people who voluntarily want to be in marriages of multiples. Why shouldn't five women get tax filing benefits or death benefits if they all want to be married to the same man. It's love. Warren Jeffs didn't do anything wrong. Why is he in prison? He just loved more than one woman and took more than one woman to wife.
I was going to put a question in my opening post asking if anyone wanted to place wagers on what page of this topic the incest/pedophilia/bestiality slippery slope fallacy would be introduced.

I am not the least surprised it showed up on page one.

You cannot use the legality of a harmless activity to justify the legalization of a harmful activity. And since some adult smoking the pole of another adult is not harmful to either participant, using that to say we would have to justify some predator marrying a child is getting to the point of willful stupidity, what with the persistence with which people like you keep using this ridiculous argument.



Even so, mainstreaming homosexual marriages into legality would not come close to causing the kind of damage that it will without the ability to punish people who do not accept that legality. Legalize same sex marriage as far as government benefits go, but allow the wedding cake baker, the photographer, the relationship counselor to say no. Allow schools the power to send homosexual children home and by all means, permit the Boy Scouts to tell the newly outed scout that he doesn't get the Eagle badge.

Then you have an argument that this is only about federal rights.
Should a wedding cake baker be allowed not to bake a cake for an interracial couple's wedding?

That is a separate issue, but I think you would find I would come down on the baker's side and defend his right to be an idiot and shortchange himself an income.

As for the wedding florist, well...he's likely to be gay himself. :lol:


As for "allow schools the power to send homosexual children home", that is such a bigoted thing to say I am speechless. And it clearly violates equal protection of the laws.


.
 
Last edited:
OP
g5000

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
93,067
Reaction score
14,782
Points
2,180
Aka government sticks its nose where it doesn't belong AGAIN....government has no business in marriage...its a contract between people that's all...no need for government to enforce people's beliefs in what marriage is based on some book of fiction.
The fact is that government is intruding on marriage. That is the reality. The law currently protects marriage contracts. The day our government granted married couples a tax exemption, it made marriage a federal issue. The day Social Security was enacted, granting spousal death benefits, the government introduced federal law into marriage contracts.

Which if you had read my opening post, you would see I addressed your point. To wit: "So, either remove the marriage privileges that are currently granted only to opposite-sex couples, or grant them to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike."

.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
49,760
Reaction score
7,179
Points
1,840
New York appeals court strikes down DOMA - CNN.com

The long and the short of their decision is that DOMA violates the 14th amendment, which is exactly correct. DOMA is unequal protection of the laws, granting special privileges to opposite-sex couples and withholding them from same-sex couples.

A same-sex married couple cannot file a federal married tax return, nor can a same-sex spouse collect Social Security death benefits, nor can they exercise a myriad of other privileges extended to opposite-sex couples.

So, either remove the marriage privileges that are currently granted only to opposite-sex couples, or grant them to same-sex and opposite-sex couples alike.

There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting the privilege of a married tax return to same-sex couples. There is no rational objection anyone can raise to granting Social Security death benefits to same-sex couples.

No societal harm arises from these activities.
.
There is nothing preventing them from marrying someone of the opposite sex, so how has equal protection been denied?
Once again...slowly...the law...grants the privilege of a married tax return to...opposite-sex couples... by law. That is the key part. The law. "Equal protection of the laws". That the law denies a married tax return to...same-sex couples...means same-sex couples...do not have equal protection of that law.

Marriage has always been a contract between a man and a woman, or hell, a man and several women.

Even if you get by on the equal protection route, You can give same sex couples the same rights in another contract recognized by the state, and equal protection can be met.
That is all they are asking for! Right now, DOMA denies the recognition of a same-sex couple's marriage contract.

That is why DOMA has been struck down.



I am denied the right to marry someone because I havent found someone dumb enough to marry me yet, Are my rights under equal protection denied?
The law is not denying you marriage or the privilege of filing a married tax return if you marry someone of the opposite sex.

This should be blindingly obvious.


.
If we go by your logic I am denied equal protection under the law because I cannot divide my income in half and then claim to file as married. I am denied a benefit someone else has due to my single status.

If it all about taxes why dont we just eliminate that part of the tax code?
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
137,161
Reaction score
15,397
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
There is nothing preventing them from marrying someone of the opposite sex, so how has equal protection been denied?
Once again...slowly...the law...grants the privilege of a married tax return to...opposite-sex couples... by law. That is the key part. The law. "Equal protection of the laws". That the law denies a married tax return to...same-sex couples...means same-sex couples...do not have equal protection of that law.



That is all they are asking for! Right now, DOMA denies the recognition of a same-sex couple's marriage contract.

That is why DOMA has been struck down.



I am denied the right to marry someone because I havent found someone dumb enough to marry me yet, Are my rights under equal protection denied?
The law is not denying you marriage or the privilege of filing a married tax return if you marry someone of the opposite sex.

This should be blindingly obvious.


.
If we go by your logic I am denied equal protection under the law because I cannot divide my income in half and then claim to file as married. I am denied a benefit someone else has due to my single status.

If it all about taxes why dont we just eliminate that part of the tax code?
Work for it....taxes need to be simplified anyways. But until that day, inequality is inequality.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Top