LGBT & ? vs Utah: Legal Arguments at 10th Circuit Begin April 10, 2014

[The Rabbi]

Because the state has a compelling interest in it. Because marriage and the family are the bedrock of society. Because the 10thA reserves to states rights not enumerated in the Constitution. Ergo states have the power to define marriage, not some unelected judge somewhere.

50% divorce rate is the bedrock of US society? Damn, absolutely screwed.

So now you're using the 10th amendment to make your point, and ignoring the 9th, and 14th, and the Supreme Court decisions on this? Well done.

50% divorce rate (and that's inaccurate) is irrelevant to the fact that most people who get married have children.
If there is a right to marry, then the power to define marriage rests with the states, not unelected judges. Something about they derive their legitimate power from the consent of the goverened.

 

[The Rabbi]

No, actually you tell me. You were the one who said that gays want to get married because "it's about the money." What money are you talking about?

The marital benefits that accrue legally. Or did you miss that part of the gay agenda?

So gay and lesbian couples want the same marital benefits that are afforded to married heterosexual couples? Why is that a bad thing?

Why should they have them? Heterosexual couples should have them because the state has an interest in fostering heterosexual marriages. The state has no interest in fostering homosexual marriages.

 

[OKTexas]

If you pass a law that defines legal marriage as being between one man and one woman, then gay and lesbian couples can't legally get married. That means that they are prohibited from getting married. That is not equality under the law. That is due only to Christians using public laws to enforce their small-minded, outdated religious dogma on secular society in violation of the First Amendment to the US Constitution.

Religion has nothing to do with it, it's called biology. And your saying they can't marry is bullshit, they have been getting married form the dawn of time, they just have been following the rules and marrying someone who is biologically compatible. That is equality.

You obviously don't know what equality means. If you pass a law which states that legally recognized marriages are only between one man and one woman, then homosexual and lesbian couples are prohibited from having a legally recognized marriage, because a homosexual couple has one man and one man, not one man and one woman. Therefore, that is not equality under the law for the homosexual couple.

How do you get equality from passing a law which specifically forbids equality?

Hey dumb ass, they guy can marry any woman he wants, legally and biologically correct and equal to other guys looking to get married. Keep spinning, your shit will never add up.

 

[KNB]

Marriage rate - 6.8 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate - 3.6 per 1,000 total population
FASTSTATS - Marriage and Divorce

 

[OKTexas]

Religion has nothing to do with it, it's called biology. And your saying they can't marry is bullshit, they have been getting married form the dawn of time, they just have been following the rules and marrying someone who is biologically compatible. That is equality.

You obviously don't know what equality means. If you pass a law which states that legally recognized marriages are only between one man and one woman, then homosexual and lesbian couples are prohibited from having a legally recognized marriage, because a homosexual couple has one man and one man, not one man and one woman. Therefore, that is not equality under the law for the homosexual couple.

How do you get equality from passing a law which specifically forbids equality?

How about a law that prohibits marriage between two consanguinous people? Between a man and a sheep? You are denying people the right to marry the animal of their choice. It is inequality.
Get it?

 

[The Rabbi]

Marriage rate - 6.8 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate - 3.6 per 1,000 total population
FASTSTATS - Marriage and Divorce

That doesnt really equate to 50% but whatever. It is irrelevant no matter what the rate.

 

[OKTexas]

Marriage rate - 6.8 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate - 3.6 per 1,000 total population
FASTSTATS - Marriage and Divorce

Irrelevant BS.

 

[KNB]

The marital benefits that accrue legally. Or did you miss that part of the gay agenda?

So gay and lesbian couples want the same marital benefits that are afforded to married heterosexual couples? Why is that a bad thing?

Why should they have them? Heterosexual couples should have them because the state has an interest in fostering heterosexual marriages. The state has no interest in fostering homosexual marriages.

They should have them because that's EQUALITY UNDER THE FUCKING LAW.

RuPaul is a gay man dressed up like a woman. Are you aware of this? If you are indeed a fan of RuPaul as you seem to suggest at the end of every single one of your posts, then why do you not want him to have the same rights and privileges as every other American? Are you one of those old white racist fucks who loved Al Jolson but wouldn't ever want to see him in a voting booth?

Do you seriously believe any of the shit that you write?

 

[frigidweirdo]

50% divorce rate (and that's inaccurate) is irrelevant to the fact that most people who get married have children.
If there is a right to marry, then the power to define marriage rests with the states, not unelected judges. Something about they derive their legitimate power from the consent of the goverened.

Of course it's inaccurate, there are no readily available statistics on this as far as I can find. But it's about right. 1st marriage is probably about 40%.

However the divorce rate is high.

Let's compare marriage to divorce. It's not great because people get divorced in different years to when they get married, so stats are always going to be estimates.

Alabama, marriage 9.8 per 1,000 people. Divorce 5.4 per 1,000. That's a divorce rate that's more than 50% the marriage rate.

Some states do have lower than 50%, but in general it's about at the 50% mark. 2 marriages to one divorce. Arizona is closer to 66% for example.


So, now this issue is purely about having children, and not whether the parents stay together for the good of the kids? Hmm.

But then again, the US doesn't have a problem producing children. In fact we should be looking at a reduction in the number of children being born, not an increase.

 

[OKTexas]

So gay and lesbian couples want the same marital benefits that are afforded to married heterosexual couples? Why is that a bad thing?

Why should they have them? Heterosexual couples should have them because the state has an interest in fostering heterosexual marriages. The state has no interest in fostering homosexual marriages.

They should have them because that's EQUALITY UNDER THE FUCKING LAW.

RuPaul is a gay man dressed up like a woman. Are you aware of this? If you are indeed a fan of RuPaul as you seem to suggest at the end of every single one of your posts, then why do you not want him to have the same rights and privileges as every other American? Are you one of those old white racist fucks who loved Al Jolson but wouldn't ever want to see him in a voting booth?

Do you seriously believe any of the shit that you write?

They have equality under the law, admit it, any man can marry any woman and any woman can marry any man. You keep dancing and deflecting but can't prove me wrong, can you?

 

[frigidweirdo]

That doesnt really equate to 50% but whatever. It is irrelevant no matter what the rate.

No, it doesn't necessarily equate to 50%. However it's impossible to say what it does equate to.

However what it does say is for every 2 marriages there is more than one divorce. And this is saying the institution of marriage, the supposed bedrock of society, is screwed, wouldn't you say that?

Also, what it doesn't say is, YOU DON'T NEED TO BE MARRIED TO HAVE SEX AND PRODUCE CHILDREN.

It also doesn't say that the US is growing by 1.4 million people per year.

Demographics of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[frigidweirdo]

They have equality under the law, admit it, any man can marry any woman and any woman can marry any man. You keep dancing and deflecting but can't prove me wrong, can you?

Separate is NOT equal, this was decided in the 1960s.

Why not prevent black people from marrying white people? It's just as fair as only allowing gay people to marry people they don't want to.

 

[KNB]

They have equality under the law, admit it, any man can marry any woman and any woman can marry any man. You keep dancing and deflecting but can't prove me wrong, can you?

That isn't equality for homosexuals and lesbians and you know it, so stop being a moron.

Do you write things like that with the intention of being taken seriously?

 

[OKTexas]

They have equality under the law, admit it, any man can marry any woman and any woman can marry any man. You keep dancing and deflecting but can't prove me wrong, can you?

Separate is NOT equal, this was decided in the 1960s.

Why not prevent black people from marrying white people? It's just as fair as only allowing gay people to marry people they don't want to.

They are not separate, there is no separation in what I said. If there is, show it to me.

 

[frigidweirdo]

They are not separate, there is no separation in what I said. If there is, show it to me.

Separate in, a gay person cannot marry a consenting adult of their CHOICE, whereas a straight person can.

 

[OKTexas]

They have equality under the law, admit it, any man can marry any woman and any woman can marry any man. You keep dancing and deflecting but can't prove me wrong, can you?

That isn't equality for homosexuals and lesbians and you know it, so stop being a moron.

Do you write things like that with the intention of being taken seriously?

You're the moron, gender is determined at birth, you can talk your bullshit but you can't change biology. You keep making fun of religious people, yet you believe gay exist, but how can you prove it? Like religion, gay is in the mind and our law address the physical being, isn't that the way you want it?

 

[frigidweirdo]

You're the moron, gender is determined at birth, you can talk your bullshit but you can't change biology. You keep making fun of religious people, yet you believe gay exist, but how can you prove it? Like religion, gay is in the mind and our law address the physical being, isn't that the way you want it?

Why does anyone need to prove whether gay people exist or not?

Someone wants to marry someone of the same sex. What's it to you or the govt?

 

[OKTexas]

They are not separate, there is no separation in what I said. If there is, show it to me.

Separate in, a gay person cannot marry a consenting adult of their CHOICE, whereas a straight person can.

Incorrect, a straight guy can't marry another guy even if he wanted to just to get the benefits.

 

[OKTexas]

You're the moron, gender is determined at birth, you can talk your bullshit but you can't change biology. You keep making fun of religious people, yet you believe gay exist, but how can you prove it? Like religion, gay is in the mind and our law address the physical being, isn't that the way you want it?

Why does anyone need to prove whether gay people exist or not?

Someone wants to marry someone of the same sex. What's it to you or the govt?

So you want our laws to accommodate your phantom beliefs, but heaven forbid they consider the beliefs of Christians. Where's the equality in that? Also, why do you keep ignoring the science aspect of the discussion?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Incorrect, a straight guy can't marry another guy even if he wanted to just to get the benefits.

Do you really need to be pedantic here?

Marrying for benefits is FRAUD, it's ILLEGAL.

Hence why a gay person marrying a person of the opposite sex would more likely than not amount to FRAUD>