DOMA ruled unconstitutional

[WorldWatcher]

Here dumb ass

The lower court (federal district court) didn't say that DOMA was unconstitutional based on Massachusetts laws.



>>>>

I hope my last post clarified what I meant.

Thank you, better - but the fact is that the decision was based on the federal Constitution and had nothing to do with Massachusetts Civil Marriage laws.


>>>>

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The lower court (federal district court) didn't say that DOMA was unconstitutional based on Massachusetts laws.



>>>>

I hope my last post clarified what I meant.

Thank you, better - but the fact is that the decision was based on the federal Constitution and had nothing to do with Massachusetts Civil Marriage laws.


>>>>

I don't agree It's just an opinion of mine but if the ruling would have been in another state that was not so gay accepting I don't think the ruling would have been the same.

 

[clevergirl]

At least within the 2500 or so they interviewed.

When I was single back in the late 70s, I was pretty promiscuous too. Then I found one person and settled down. That is what these people are seeking.

Unless you can show any other group that was banned from marrying because they were promiscuous?

Oh, I get it, the statistics didn't matter until they matter in order to dismiss them? Yes, I know you didn't like the response, you thought your last post was clever. Pick a square and land on it. The sample share is bigger then most sample shares, statistically speaking. The fact of the matter is, homosexuals are a very promiscuous group. Monogamy is not the norm.

This just in. Humans like sex...OMG
Who gives a shit who people are *******. Its none of your business who people ****.

Think of it this way. The more gay sex the less abortions that happen.

Seriously mind your own business.

This is not a debate about who ***** who, but about who marries who. It is a national debate. It is being debated in this very thread.

As to who ***** who I couldn't be less interested. But when it comes to law, ethics, and policy- I guess I get to have an opinion- just like you.

Asshole.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Oh, I get it, the statistics didn't matter until they matter in order to dismiss them? Yes, I know you didn't like the response, you thought your last post was clever. Pick a square and land on it. The sample share is bigger then most sample shares, statistically speaking. The fact of the matter is, homosexuals are a very promiscuous group. Monogamy is not the norm.

This just in. Humans like sex...OMG
Who gives a shit who people are *******. Its none of your business who people ****.

Think of it this way. The more gay sex the less abortions that happen.

Seriously mind your own business.

This is not a debate about who ***** who, but about who marries who. It is a national debate. It is being debated in this very thread.

As to who ***** who I couldn't be less interested. But when it comes to law, ethics, and policy- I guess I get to have an opinion- just like you.

Asshole.

Did you check out that link I posted?

 

[clevergirl]

And that decision was upheld by a straight appeals court. However if you think the SCOTUS is going to settle the issue based on the Prop 8 case, you are probably mistaken. They are likely to uphold the appeals court decision, but tailor it to the very narrow set of circumstances present in the Prop 8 case (a right once granted under the State Constitution, being taken away after that right had been exercised by the people).

But it may surprise you to learn that I disagree with the filing of the initial Prop 8 case to begin with. Prop 8 passed by a very narrow amount, a change of less than 3% would have resulted in a different outcome. IMHO, supporters of Same-sex Civil Marriage would have been much better off holding on a court case and instead implementing a campaign to change the mind of voters and then put it back on the ballot. It would likely have been on the ballot this year and passed. Passage in the largest state of the union by voter initiative would have gained much more momentum for other states then what winning in court is likely to do.



>>>>

Regardless of your opinion, the FACTS are that the only way homosexual marriage has been passed is by fiat of legislating it from the bench.

Your "FACTS" are wrong, the majority of legal entities that have laws allowing Same-sex Civil Marriage have occurred through legislative action (6 of 9), not court action (3 of 9). Even if both referendums fail in the fall, it will still be a majority through legislative action (4 of 7).

• Connecticut = Court Action
• Iowa = Court Action
• Maryland = Legislative Action (Pending referendum in November)
• Massachusetts = Court Action
• New Hampshire = Legislative Action
• New York = Legislative Action
• Vermont = Legislative Action
• Washington, DC = Legislative Action
• Washington State = Legislative Action (Pending referendum in November)

>>>>

You are correct- I should have said- by way of ballot measures. None of the same sex marriage acts have passed by ballot.

 

[clevergirl]

This just in. Humans like sex...OMG
Who gives a shit who people are *******. Its none of your business who people ****.

Think of it this way. The more gay sex the less abortions that happen.

Seriously mind your own business.

This is not a debate about who ***** who, but about who marries who. It is a national debate. It is being debated in this very thread.

As to who ***** who I couldn't be less interested. But when it comes to law, ethics, and policy- I guess I get to have an opinion- just like you.

Asshole.

Did you check out that link I posted?

No, this thread has kept me a tad busy just keeping up with my own responses Repost it to me in this response and I'll check it out.

I notice if you have other life things to attend to, you are accused of "running away". I guess I am a rare oddity in that I manage to unchain myself from the keyboard

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Oh, I get it, the statistics didn't matter until they matter in order to dismiss them? Yes, I know you didn't like the response, you thought your last post was clever. Pick a square and land on it. The sample share is bigger then most sample shares, statistically speaking. The fact of the matter is, homosexuals are a very promiscuous group. Monogamy is not the norm.

This just in. Humans like sex...OMG
Who gives a shit who people are *******. Its none of your business who people ****.

Think of it this way. The more gay sex the less abortions that happen.

Seriously mind your own business.

This is not a debate about who ***** who, but about who marries who. It is a national debate. It is being debated in this very thread.

As to who ***** who I couldn't be less interested. But when it comes to law, ethics, and policy- I guess I get to have an opinion- just like you.

Asshole.

And you’re entitled to your opinion…

Provided you understand it doesn’t comport with the Constitution and its case law.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

This is not a debate about who ***** who, but about who marries who. It is a national debate. It is being debated in this very thread.

As to who ***** who I couldn't be less interested. But when it comes to law, ethics, and policy- I guess I get to have an opinion- just like you.

Asshole.

Did you check out that link I posted?

No, this thread has kept me a tad busy just keeping up with my own responses Repost it to me in this response and I'll check it out.

I notice if you have other life things to attend to, you are accused of "running away". I guess I am a rare oddity in that I manage to unchain myself from the keyboard

So Why Is It Likely That Same-Sex Marriages Won’t Last So Long?
Despite the paucity of statistical data, now and well into the future, it is nonetheless reasonably prudent to predict that same-sex marriages will be shorter lived than straight ones, for a variety of statistical, sociological and legal reasons, summarized as follows:
1. Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often.
Will Gay Marriages Last as Long as Straight Ones? « Making It Legal

 

[clevergirl]

This just in. Humans like sex...OMG
Who gives a shit who people are *******. Its none of your business who people ****.

Think of it this way. The more gay sex the less abortions that happen.

Seriously mind your own business.

This is not a debate about who ***** who, but about who marries who. It is a national debate. It is being debated in this very thread.

As to who ***** who I couldn't be less interested. But when it comes to law, ethics, and policy- I guess I get to have an opinion- just like you.

Asshole.

And you’re entitled to your opinion…

Provided you understand it doesn’t comport with the Constitution and its case law.

I understand that SCOTUS has not ruled on the matter. Do you understand that to?

 

[WinterBorn]

Did you check out that link I posted?

No, this thread has kept me a tad busy just keeping up with my own responses Repost it to me in this response and I'll check it out.

I notice if you have other life things to attend to, you are accused of "running away". I guess I am a rare oddity in that I manage to unchain myself from the keyboard

So Why Is It Likely That Same-Sex Marriages Won’t Last So Long?
Despite the paucity of statistical data, now and well into the future, it is nonetheless reasonably prudent to predict that same-sex marriages will be shorter lived than straight ones, for a variety of statistical, sociological and legal reasons, summarized as follows:
1. Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often.
Will Gay Marriages Last as Long as Straight Ones? « Making It Legal

" Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often."

Sounds like the hatred expressed against gays has made it more difficult, and that difficulty is now being used as an excuse.

 

[clevergirl]

Did you check out that link I posted?

No, this thread has kept me a tad busy just keeping up with my own responses Repost it to me in this response and I'll check it out.

I notice if you have other life things to attend to, you are accused of "running away". I guess I am a rare oddity in that I manage to unchain myself from the keyboard

So Why Is It Likely That Same-Sex Marriages Won’t Last So Long?
Despite the paucity of statistical data, now and well into the future, it is nonetheless reasonably prudent to predict that same-sex marriages will be shorter lived than straight ones, for a variety of statistical, sociological and legal reasons, summarized as follows:
1. Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often.
Will Gay Marriages Last as Long as Straight Ones? « Making It Legal

Thanks, I had already seen this.

 

[bodecea]

No, this thread has kept me a tad busy just keeping up with my own responses Repost it to me in this response and I'll check it out.

I notice if you have other life things to attend to, you are accused of "running away". I guess I am a rare oddity in that I manage to unchain myself from the keyboard

So Why Is It Likely That Same-Sex Marriages Won’t Last So Long?
Despite the paucity of statistical data, now and well into the future, it is nonetheless reasonably prudent to predict that same-sex marriages will be shorter lived than straight ones, for a variety of statistical, sociological and legal reasons, summarized as follows:
1. Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often.
Will Gay Marriages Last as Long as Straight Ones? « Making It Legal

Thanks, I had already seen this.

26 years and counting. Yours?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, this thread has kept me a tad busy just keeping up with my own responses Repost it to me in this response and I'll check it out.

I notice if you have other life things to attend to, you are accused of "running away". I guess I am a rare oddity in that I manage to unchain myself from the keyboard

So Why Is It Likely That Same-Sex Marriages Won’t Last So Long?
Despite the paucity of statistical data, now and well into the future, it is nonetheless reasonably prudent to predict that same-sex marriages will be shorter lived than straight ones, for a variety of statistical, sociological and legal reasons, summarized as follows:
1. Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often.
Will Gay Marriages Last as Long as Straight Ones? « Making It Legal

" Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often."

Sounds like the hatred expressed against gays has made it more difficult, and that difficulty is now being used as an excuse.

I really don't know what your beef is. It's another pro gay source.

 

[MaxCha]

Hardly, since monogamy, statistically speaking, is rare within the homosexual community.

Ummm, look at bit harder and you'll see that more RECENT and ACCURATE study's have shown nearly identical promiscuity rates between heterosexual and homosexual MEN. And even if there was a difference, other powerful variables (social disdain of gay people/ denial of the ability to marry/ people who are the most abstinent usually do so due to strict religious dogma that promotes abstinece and the belief being gay is evil, hence remain in the closet) are the factors.

Not sure if you're looking at the SOURCE of your study (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry).

Look up Research Methods and see that a group with a pre-study bias is unable to make objective claims, and there research is not ever used by science at large.

Your numbers are similar to another study done by an anti-gay group that found similar results - much higher rates of promiscuity in gay men.

Then they later showed the "researchers" found their subjects at a Gay SEX CLUB.

Ha, talk about bias.

Just because the stereotype of gay men is that they are promiscuous, sissies who can't commit - doesn't mean that's true.

Other studies show that people's acceptance of gay people and belief that they're no different than straight people is DIRECTLY correlated to people's life experience with gay people. You'd think if gay people were truly amoral and harmful to society, more personal experience with them would make people feel the other way?

Oh yeah. The evil gay agenda is indoctrinating people through lies.

 

[MaxCha]

Oh God, I just read the Bell and Weinberg study cited before that shows extreme rates of promiscuity in gay men.

The "study" of old gay men claims that 43% of gay men have had 500+ sexual partners!! That is the most outrageous thing I have ever heard!

Being that studies on both sides, if read closely, show that there are a good deal more gay men who remain abstinent than straight men - and this number doesn't even include the many, many seemingly a-sexual men we all meet in life who are likely gay and repressed, hence abstinent.

Averaging in those nearly completely abstinent men, the study would show that 70% of gay men have had 500 to 1,000+ sex partners!

Now I know from reading some studies from the 70's and 80's that there were some gay men having sex with literally a thousand or more people, but this is likely an expected increase considering the sudden visibility and reduced rates of oppression that occurred at the same time, coupled with the fact that the social perception that homosexuality was a sick perversion influenced the minds of the men and was a self-fufulling prophecy.

Of the dozens of gay dudes I've befriended, I have NEVER met someone who has had sex even a fraction that many times. Never.

I sure as hell haven't. Not even 1/100th that amount.

 

[WinterBorn]

So Why Is It Likely That Same-Sex Marriages Won’t Last So Long?
Despite the paucity of statistical data, now and well into the future, it is nonetheless reasonably prudent to predict that same-sex marriages will be shorter lived than straight ones, for a variety of statistical, sociological and legal reasons, summarized as follows:
1. Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often.
Will Gay Marriages Last as Long as Straight Ones? « Making It Legal

" Same-sex couples are far less likely to raise children together, for obvious biological reasons and because of lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting, and it is well established that having children leads couples to get married and stay married more often."

Sounds like the hatred expressed against gays has made it more difficult, and that difficulty is now being used as an excuse.

I really don't know what your beef is. It's another pro gay source.

I don't have a beef with the source. I have a beef with the hate-mongers who have created the "...lingering consequences of a socialization that discourages lesbians and gay men from parenting".

 

[clevergirl]

Hardly, since monogamy, statistically speaking, is rare within the homosexual community.

Ummm, look at bit harder and you'll see that more RECENT and ACCURATE study's have shown nearly identical promiscuity rates between heterosexual and homosexual MEN. And even if there was a difference, other powerful variables (social disdain of gay people/ denial of the ability to marry/ people who are the most abstinent usually do so due to strict religious dogma that promotes abstinece and the belief being gay is evil, hence remain in the closet) are the factors.

Not sure if you're looking at the SOURCE of your study (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry).

Look up Research Methods and see that a group with a pre-study bias is unable to make objective claims, and there research is not ever used by science at large.

Your numbers are similar to another study done by an anti-gay group that found similar results - much higher rates of promiscuity in gay men.

Then they later showed the "researchers" found their subjects at a Gay SEX CLUB.

Ha, talk about bias.

Just because the stereotype of gay men is that they are promiscuous, sissies who can't commit - doesn't mean that's true.

Other studies show that people's acceptance of gay people and belief that they're no different than straight people is DIRECTLY correlated to people's life experience with gay people. You'd think if gay people were truly amoral and harmful to society, more personal experience with them would make people feel the other way?

Oh yeah. The evil gay agenda is indoctrinating people through lies.

That is not the source- that is the website that provides access to to their sourced information... Note that each statistic has an independent source.

It is not a stereotype- The statistics come from interviews of over 2600 homosexual men.

 

[MaxCha]

Hardly, since monogamy, statistically speaking, is rare within the homosexual community.

Ummm, look at bit harder and you'll see that more RECENT and ACCURATE study's have shown nearly identical promiscuity rates between heterosexual and homosexual MEN. And even if there was a difference, other powerful variables (social disdain of gay people/ denial of the ability to marry/ people who are the most abstinent usually do so due to strict religious dogma that promotes abstinece and the belief being gay is evil, hence remain in the closet) are the factors.

Not sure if you're looking at the SOURCE of your study (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry).

Look up Research Methods and see that a group with a pre-study bias is unable to make objective claims, and there research is not ever used by science at large.

Your numbers are similar to another study done by an anti-gay group that found similar results - much higher rates of promiscuity in gay men.

Then they later showed the "researchers" found their subjects at a Gay SEX CLUB.

Ha, talk about bias.

Just because the stereotype of gay men is that they are promiscuous, sissies who can't commit - doesn't mean that's true.

Other studies show that people's acceptance of gay people and belief that they're no different than straight people is DIRECTLY correlated to people's life experience with gay people. You'd think if gay people were truly amoral and harmful to society, more personal experience with them would make people feel the other way?

Oh yeah. The evil gay agenda is indoctrinating people through lies.

That is not the source- that is the website that provides access to to their sourced information... Note that each statistic has an independent source.

It is not a stereotype- The statistics come from interviews of over 2600 homosexual men.

Ugg. I'd link you to the studies I already named, but what's the use. If you think being gay is wrong, you'll only accept affirmations to your belief.

Why is it that some people must always fight tooth and nail for people to have the basic respect and equality we humans deserve? Women, Blacks, interracial couples. Yet with each new group to attack they say "okay, but the times before were different. People were ignorant back then. But we really mean it this time!

 

[Seawytch]

Hardly, since monogamy, statistically speaking, is rare within the homosexual community.

Ummm, look at bit harder and you'll see that more RECENT and ACCURATE study's have shown nearly identical promiscuity rates between heterosexual and homosexual MEN. And even if there was a difference, other powerful variables (social disdain of gay people/ denial of the ability to marry/ people who are the most abstinent usually do so due to strict religious dogma that promotes abstinece and the belief being gay is evil, hence remain in the closet) are the factors.

Not sure if you're looking at the SOURCE of your study (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry).

Look up Research Methods and see that a group with a pre-study bias is unable to make objective claims, and there research is not ever used by science at large.

Your numbers are similar to another study done by an anti-gay group that found similar results - much higher rates of promiscuity in gay men.

Then they later showed the "researchers" found their subjects at a Gay SEX CLUB.

Ha, talk about bias.

Just because the stereotype of gay men is that they are promiscuous, sissies who can't commit - doesn't mean that's true.

Other studies show that people's acceptance of gay people and belief that they're no different than straight people is DIRECTLY correlated to people's life experience with gay people. You'd think if gay people were truly amoral and harmful to society, more personal experience with them would make people feel the other way?

Oh yeah. The evil gay agenda is indoctrinating people through lies.

That is not the source- that is the website that provides access to to their sourced information... Note that each statistic has an independent source.

It is not a stereotype- The statistics come from interviews of over 2600 homosexual men.

In other words, you have it your head that we **** all the time and nothing is going to change your opinion of that.

It doesn't matter to you that marriage actually promotes monogamy and allowing gays and lesbians to legally marry could reduce the promiscuity you seem to believe is so rampant in the gay community.

It doesn't matter to you that most of us know more people in committed relationships than the converse. It doesn't matter to you that Bod had been in a two decade long relationship and I'm right behind her (17 years and counting).

You want to believe all we do is ****. Well sister, that's your hangup and no reason to deny our families the legal protections of civil marriage.

And I'm sorry, but OF COURSE gay men are more promiscuous. Straight men would be just as promiscuous if women LET THEM.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Ummm, look at bit harder and you'll see that more RECENT and ACCURATE study's have shown nearly identical promiscuity rates between heterosexual and homosexual MEN. And even if there was a difference, other powerful variables (social disdain of gay people/ denial of the ability to marry/ people who are the most abstinent usually do so due to strict religious dogma that promotes abstinece and the belief being gay is evil, hence remain in the closet) are the factors.

Not sure if you're looking at the SOURCE of your study (Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry).

Look up Research Methods and see that a group with a pre-study bias is unable to make objective claims, and there research is not ever used by science at large.

Your numbers are similar to another study done by an anti-gay group that found similar results - much higher rates of promiscuity in gay men.

Then they later showed the "researchers" found their subjects at a Gay SEX CLUB.

Ha, talk about bias.

Just because the stereotype of gay men is that they are promiscuous, sissies who can't commit - doesn't mean that's true.

Other studies show that people's acceptance of gay people and belief that they're no different than straight people is DIRECTLY correlated to people's life experience with gay people. You'd think if gay people were truly amoral and harmful to society, more personal experience with them would make people feel the other way?

Oh yeah. The evil gay agenda is indoctrinating people through lies.

That is not the source- that is the website that provides access to to their sourced information... Note that each statistic has an independent source.

It is not a stereotype- The statistics come from interviews of over 2600 homosexual men.

In other words, you have it your head that we **** all the time and nothing is going to change your opinion of that.

It doesn't matter to you that marriage actually promotes monogamy and allowing gays and lesbians to legally marry could reduce the promiscuity you seem to believe is so rampant in the gay community.

It doesn't matter to you that most of us know more people in committed relationships than the converse. It doesn't matter to you that Bod had been in a two decade long relationship and I'm right behind her (17 years and counting).

You want to believe all we do is ****. Well sister, that's your hangup and no reason to deny our families the legal protections of civil marriage.

And I'm sorry, but OF COURSE gay men are more promiscuous. Straight men would be just as promiscuous if women LET THEM.

Touchy as it is to admit, even though there are understandable reasons having to do with a history of discrimination and family mistreatment, my perception is that there has been a higher frequency of emotional instability, alcohol and chemical dependency, and relationship conflicts in our community. It will take a generation or so of true social acceptance of same-sex relationships (especially for younger gay folks, where these attitudes are formed) before these lingering impacts of homophobia will be eradicated, and so it is likely that our relationships will continue to be more turbulent for a few more decades to come.