
TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Health Inspectors shut down 7-year-old girl's lemonade stand
Pages (12): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »
Posted by idoru on Aug-07-2010 20:37:
| quote: |
Originally posted by The17sss
Yeah... checks and balances are working out swimmingly.
You only exist today, in the lifestyle and living standard you have, with incredible amounts of opportunity afforded to you because of the Founders' actions 230+ years ago. Who knows what kind of place this country would be otherwise, considering the history of the world. You should be ashamed of yourself for saying "fuck the founders" you ungrateful little prick. |
Posted by Joss Weatherby on Aug-07-2010 20:37:
Kevin it comes down to something very simple: you can not make a legal class of people and then discriminate against people from joining that legal class on the basis of religion or gender. That is a violation of the 14th amendment because you deny a certain eligible group the same legal protections that another group has when in all other instances, besides that of the gender of the members of the group (which has already been established in hundreds of cases as being something you can not discriminate based on), that group is the exact same.
This judge was not being an activist, he was being right. It will get reaffirmed in the 9th (duh) and upheld in the Supreme Court.
Like I said, if you do not like how it works, then you can get the fuck out and move to some country that doesn't have a functioning, legitimate court system. Try Somalia? Oh I forgot, black people and Kevin hates black people because he is living in FROM the south and he is a Republican.
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 20:41:
| quote: |
Originally posted by The17sss
A gay judge ruling against the traditional definition of marriage, who wanted the unprecedented step of having cameras put in the courtroom before this show trial. Yeah, not activist at all. LOL!
What?
How can it be a "different class" if Civil Unions get the exact same rights/benefits afforded to them as married heterosexuals? Explain then how a heterosexual couple isn't being discriminated against for not being allowed to partake in a Civil Union? |
He is known for being very harsh on gays, even though he is gay himself.
Who gives a fuck about the traditional definition? Traditional just means outdated in this sense. Why the hell shouldn't gay people be allowed to marry? Because it said in the Old Testament that it is wrong?
Yeah, wanting cameras is so activist! He's fucking crazy. Watch out for him!
Did you pay attention to the trial at all? The defense in the case had no hard evidence at all to support their opinion, their experts were idiots, and all they tried to do was keep saying that gay couples aren't as good as heterosexual couples.
Yeah, they get the same rights, but they're called something else. They're not allowed to be married. That's only for the normal people. Marriage is sacred and holy and we can't allow them to defile it!
Posted by The17sss on Aug-07-2010 20:43:
| quote: |
Originally posted by idoru
Lame joke aside, lets say that Kevin is correct about Proposition 8 in California, and that the judge should not have gone against the will of the people. That's gravy. What, then about other states that don't recognize even a civil union for homosexual couples? Does that or does that not violate the fourteenth amendment? |
Let me be clear: I have zero problem with Civil Unions. I have zero problems with gay couples having all the exact same level of legal protection and rights/benefits afforded to them via Civil Unions as strait people do via traditional marriage. I don't agree with the trampling of states' rights, and I don't agree with using the word "discrimination" to change the traditional meaning of the word "marriage". If Civil Unions are exactly equal under law as marriage, what's the problem? Why is there such a desire to de-construct the traditional institutions in this country?
Posted by Joss Weatherby on Aug-07-2010 20:44:
| quote: |
Originally posted by The17sss
Let me be clear: I have zero problem with Civil Unions. I have zero problems with gay couples having all the exact same level of legal protection and rights/benefits afforded to them via Civil Unions as strait people do via traditional marriage. I don't agree with the trampling of states' rights, and I don't agree with using the word "discrimination" to change the traditional meaning of the word "marriage". If Civil Unions are exactly equal under law as marriage, what's the problem? Why is there such a desire to de-construct the traditional institutions in this country? |
Kevin supports segregation in the South!
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 20:47:
| quote: |
Originally posted by The17sss
Yeah... checks and balances are working out swimmingly.
You only exist today, in the lifestyle and living standard you have, with incredible amounts of opportunity afforded to you because of the Founders' actions 230+ years ago. Who knows what kind of place this country would be otherwise, considering the history of the world. You should be ashamed of yourself for saying "fuck the founders" you ungrateful little prick. |
Fuck. The. Founders.
Seriously, why do all Conservatives hold them up to be these amazing people? Yes, I respect what they did and think they were very smart people (white men), but that doesn't mean I have to think they were perfect, that their opinion should rule the country now, and that I need to suck their dicks.
They owned slaves, didn't allow women to vote, and had a lot of flaws. I'm not going to pretend that they were perfect individuals.
Oh, and I only exist today in the lifestyle and with the living standards I have because of a lot of things, not just the founders' actions. The big bang, for one, definitely has a lot more to do with it than the founders' actions.
Posted by Joss Weatherby on Aug-07-2010 20:49:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Lews
The big bang, for one, definitely has a lot more to do with it than the founders' actions. |
Yea you could be living in Europe with their bad plumbing and expensive free health care if it wasn't for the founders!
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 20:51:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Yea you could be living in Europe with their bad plumbing and expensive free health care if it wasn't for the founders! |
Hey, their bad plumbing is older than this country
Posted by idoru on Aug-07-2010 20:52:
| quote: |
Originally posted by The17sss
Let me be clear: I have zero problem with Civil Unions. I have zero problems with gay couples having all the exact same level of legal protection and rights/benefits afforded to them via Civil Unions as strait people do via traditional marriage. I don't agree with the trampling of states' rights, and I don't agree with using the word "discrimination" to change the traditional meaning of the word "marriage". If Civil Unions are exactly equal under law as marriage, what's the problem? |
I know that, but you did an astute job of missing the point so allow me to ask again...
There are states that do not allow both homosexual marriages or civil unions. Neither are recognized by the state. Got that? Okay, good. Now, do those states violate the fourteenth amendment?
| quote: |
| Why is there such a desire to de-construct the traditional institutions in this country? |
Other than the issue of homosexual marriage, what "traditions" are being radically de-constructed? Times change, traditions change and people, society and cultures evolve. Why can't we adapt traditions to reflect our current society? If we keep the core values of these traditions alive, where is the harm?
In addition, why is it such a terrible thing for homosexuals to be considered "married" to each other? Yeah, I get that it's not "traditional", but one thing that I have never understood amongst this fervored debate throughout the years is why so many people see the concept as vile. Can you explain that to me? I'm not trying to be rude here, it's just something that I have simply never understood.
Posted by Renzo on Aug-07-2010 20:59:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Lews
Fuck. The. Founders.
Seriously, why do all Conservatives hold them up to be these amazing people? Yes, I respect what they did and think they were very smart people (white men), but that doesn't mean I have to think they were perfect, that their opinion should rule the country now, and that I need to suck their dicks. |
You can't say "fuck the founders" and then say you respect them for what they did. That makes zero sense.
Posted by The17sss on Aug-07-2010 21:01:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Lews
Who gives a fuck about the traditional definition? Traditional just means outdated in this sense. Why the hell shouldn't gay people be allowed to marry? Because it said in the Old Testament that it is wrong? |
Plenty of people do. In fact, a majority of the American population believe in the traditional definition. Sure some traditions are outdated, but what the fuck... traditions also preserve culture and replacing the old with the new isn't always right. Besides, gay people can marry- it's called a Civil Union and it is the exact same thing under the law as marriage is for heterosexuals. Can I join the Girl Scouts as a boy? Oh fuck that! Discrimination!!
| quote: |
Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Like I said, if you do not like how it works, then you can get the fuck out and move to some country that doesn't have a functioning, legitimate court system. Try Somalia? Oh I forgot, black people and Kevin hates black people because he is living in FROM the south and he is a Republican. |
First of all, uncle Fester, I'm from Boston. I just happen to live in the south. But listen to me carefully you worthless piece shit... I guarantee there is a laundry list of things you don't like that happens in this country. So don't be a hypocrite and take your own advice and move the fuck out of this country. I'm fucking sick and tired of your baseless accusations, like "Kevin hates black people" or that I don't know how to properly handle my relationship with my brother in Afghanistan. I understand the most you get out of life is being an internet troll and trying to ruffle peoples' feathers, while you live a lonely existence of pathetic basement living and no High School diploma. And that's fine if that's how you want to be. And you can take this as a threat if you want, and report me to the fucking authorities... but believe me that I mean this when I say it: I hope to christ I cross paths with you one day because I want you to be this personally disrespectful to my face. And even when you don't have the balls to do it, as cowardly self-loathing fucks like you notoriously don't when confronted, I am still going to beat you within an inch of your sad little joke of a life. I rarely wish bad on anybody, but I truly and deeply wish nothing but the most debilitating and painful death for you.
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 21:03:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Renzo
You can't say "fuck the founders" and then say you respect them for what they did. That makes zero sense. |
Why not? I say fuck you to my friends all the time and still respect (some of) them 
I was mostly just saying that they really weren't as fantastic as Fox News and Conservatives like to pretend they were
Posted by The17sss on Aug-07-2010 21:05:
| quote: |
Originally posted by idoru
I know that, but you did an astute job of missing the point so allow me to ask again...
There are states that do not allow both homosexual marriages or civil unions. Neither are recognized by the state. Got that? Okay, good. Now, do those states violate the fourteenth amendment? |
I thought you'd pick up that my reply was an answer to that question. Yes the 14th amendment is being violated in my opinion if any human being is not afforded equal rights as another. I just simply believe "civil union" and "marriage" are 2 separate but equal things for 2 separate but equal groups.
Posted by R.j. on Aug-07-2010 21:06:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Lews
Why not? I say fuck you to my friends all the time and still respect (some of) them 
I was mostly just saying that they really weren't as fantastic as Fox News and Conservatives like to pretend they were |
I suppose you never paid attention in History class, or it all just went over your head.
Posted by R.j. on Aug-07-2010 21:07:
| quote: |
Originally posted by The17sss
2 separate but equal things for 2 separate but equal groups. |
I'm not saying that I disagree with you, but people are going to jump on that and twist your words.
Posted by The17sss on Aug-07-2010 21:08:
| quote: |
Originally posted by R.j.
I'm not saying that I disagree with you, but people are going to jump on that and twist your words. |
another day, another dollar!
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 21:10:
| quote: |
Originally posted by R.j.
I suppose you never paid attention in History class, or it all just went over your head. |
So because I don't think the founders were sent straight from God it went right over my head?
Posted by The17sss on Aug-07-2010 21:12:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Lews
So because I don't think the founders were sent straight from God it went right over my head? |
I still don't get why you had to say "the founders (white)". Man you lefties are obsessed with all things racial.
And, nobody said they were perfect... you set up a little straw man with that comment.
Posted by R.j. on Aug-07-2010 21:12:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Lews
So because I don't think the founders were sent straight from God it went right over my head? |
Why does everyone have to insert the word God? That's about the oldest, most tired approach to take.
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 21:14:
| quote: |
Originally posted by R.j.
Why does everyone have to insert the word God? That's about the oldest, most tired approach to take. |
Sorry, so because I don't think the founders were the most awesome and important people ever everything I learned in History went over my head?
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 21:15:
| quote: |
Originally posted by The17sss
Plenty of people do. In fact, a majority of the American population believe in the traditional definition. Sure some traditions are outdated, but what the fuck... traditions also preserve culture and replacing the old with the new isn't always right. Besides, gay people can marry- it's called a Civil Union and it is the exact same thing under the law as marriage is for heterosexuals. Can I join the Girl Scouts as a boy? Oh fuck that! Discrimination!!
|
The "traditional" definition of marriage is a contract between two families usually used for political means. Love and sex had nothing to do with it, it was all just political shit. It's only been recently that all this romantic stuff has existed in marriage. Marriages now are quite different to how they used to be.
Why does allowing it to be two people of the same sex destroy anything important? Allowing people to love is bad? Why?
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 21:16:
| quote: |
Originally posted by The17sss
I thought you'd pick up that my reply was an answer to that question. Yes the 14th amendment is being violated in my opinion if any human being is not afforded equal rights as another. I just simply believe "civil union" and "marriage" are 2 separate but equal things for 2 separate but equal groups. |
So segregation in the south was okay?
Posted by R.j. on Aug-07-2010 21:17:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Lews
Sorry, so because I don't think the founders were the most awesome and important people ever everything I learned in History went over my head? |
You're just an ingrate. I don't have to tell you why. Anybody could read these remarks of yours and discern that.
Posted by Lews on Aug-07-2010 21:18:
| quote: |
Originally posted by R.j.
You're just an ingrate. I don't have to tell you why. Anybody could read these remarks of yours and discern that. |
Ahh, good one. The old, "it's obvious, so I don't have to explain," excuse.
Really, nice ad hominem. No need to explain anything when you can just attack the person instead!
Posted by R.j. on Aug-07-2010 21:19:
| quote: |
Originally posted by Lews
Ahh, good one. The old, "it's obvious, so I don't have to explain," excuse. |
I said I didn't have to, but I still did, didn't I?
Pages (12): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.