Opening Briefs: Plaintiffs explain why marriage matters to the Supreme Court Today, plaintiffs in the four cases before the United States Supreme Court will submit their briefs to the Court explaining why the freedom to marry matters.Opening Briefs: Plaintiffs explain why marriage matters to the Supreme Court | Freedom to Marry On January 16, the United States Supreme Court granted review of an out-of-step ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, which ruled in November against the freedom to marry in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. In each of these cases, federal judges had ruled in favor of the freedom to marry for all, and the 6th Circuit reversed each decision Get over it !
We are not a democracy, we are a constitutional republic. Look it up. Discrimination: A action that denies social participation or human rights to categories of people based on prejudice. This includes treatment of an individual or group based on their actual or perceived membership in a certain group or social category. If you put someone in jail because they broke a law, that is not discrimination because it is based on the person's actions, not what social group he belonged in. If you put someone in jail because they are black, gay, or jewish, regardless of what they did, that is discrimination. Now as for wanting to form communities with people based on a same interest, everyone wants that. We all want to be around people who are like us. The reality is that there are people who are different. Get used to it. Now wanting to be around your own kind is not discrimination. Not letting a gay couple buy the house next to you because you don't want to live by them is. Do you see the difference? Did I answer your question satisfactory? I'm not surprised. If you don't want to live around open gays, then you have every right to move. They have every right to live where they want, see above about hiring and I already talked about how you don't have the right not to be offended. And again, putting people in prison for breaking laws IS NOT THE SAME as keeping gays out of your neighborhood or keeping them from talking about gay rights. I have every right to be offended, as you do, for any reason. There is nothing says people can't be offended. And again, you cannot refuse to hire someone based purely on what social group they belong to. That is discrimination. I think you are confused about what self expression is. You are wrong, and by wrong, I mean really, really wrong. Our founding fathers wrote the Constitution to protect the rights of all against the tyranny of the majority (a phrase used by John Adams). Even the Federalist Papers (which were written to persuade people to ratify the Constitution) talks about "the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." As for common sense, there is no such thing. It is a myth created by the ignorant. Logic and knowledge is what carries the day. Oh, and the Constitution has been changed, 17 times. What standards are you talking about? Ok, the reason I keep referring to the Constitution is because that is where our rights come from and this is what this whole thread is about. And you are partially right, if laws only server a minority of people it is tyranny, but so are laws that only server the majority.
Whatever doesn't kill them makes them crazier. And I thought that people on this forum were creative with their clap trap when all while, their paranoid fantasies were already out their.
This is unbelievable! How stupid and crazy can these people be.? Not only do they have no legitimate first amendment claim, but they also have no concept of how our system of laws and government works
Highlighting Candidates Records on LGBT Equality As a resource to journalists, this website highlights the public statements of Republican candidates on key issues including: support for marriage equality, support for non-discrimination bills, opposition to dangerous conversion therapy, history of harmful rhetoric, and support for the right of LGBT Americans to adopt. The second phase of the project will cover the positions of potential Democratic candidates on LGBT issues. As candidates evolve and expand their positions on LGBT issues, and as the field expands this research will be updated to take into account their most recent publicly available statements. Additions, questions and suggestions can be sent to 2016research@hrc.org http://www.hrc.org/2016RepublicanFacts
See the actual text here https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/15-0008 (Sodomy).pdf This is insane! It goes beyond Russia, Uganda or anything, anywhere else. This is pure hate in the name of God
This is exactly what this country does not need. The perpetuation of divisiveness. It's time to move on. Get over it. Stop Right Now!
Sound like it's going to grow and go forever. If governments and law expert can't decide what is constitutional or what is not, you or me can't for sure. I suggest you to use common sense, yes, logic is a common sense and laws and constitution they are here to serve interests of people. If they are not serving majority, then it's a tyranny, right? It's a pure discrimination that I can't form a community of like-minded people, refuse to hire or live around people I don't like. It's just doesn't make logically why it should be this way - some people don't like others for something and have to suffer tolerating them?! You offering to live in some kind of sado-mazohist society. If you don't like somebody, of course you are discriminating that person, so what? Like you don't want to be around him/her, give him/her gifts, say hello, etc. This is why I am trying to understand what is really "discrimination". It's just a part of normal relationship, isn't it, you are not supposed to like everyone, right? And "prejudice"? Lets say, since blacks have worst criminal statistic, I shouldn't avoid blacks? Yes, first encountered black can be good, but probability is significantly lower, then for a white person. So, I don't want to have a chance to be killed and I will be rather "prejudice" and "discriminate" him by not picking up him as a hitchhiker for example, or not hire him. As you see "discrimination" and "prejudice" are based on a pure logic and laws against "discrimination" and "prejudice" don't make sense, they suppress people and crashing their will. I agree with Ron Paul: http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/civil-rights-act/ "the forced integration dictated by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 increased racial tensions while diminishing individual liberty." The same with homos-forced integration. Just think logically-if you are forcing some people to tolerate someone they don't like, what is the point of forcing? I can end up moving away for whole my life, this is the point - fight for my rights to have a secure community with like minded people. You are not going to have a harmony in such of society. You don't want to have a society without hate and life in a harmony? So, why don't you use your logic? Or common sense? You are suggesting a society with suppressed feelings, what is not a harmony. It will eventually go into hate crimes and what we see around is a prove. According to your logic I see that you want to have a hate crimes or keep people unhappy, by suppressing their feelings. I am not suggesting to put gays, jews, blacks, etc into jails, you are messing things up. I gave you an example, that putting people in jail can be also easily interpreted as unconstitutional and violation of rights, when people are trying to express themselves on some way. I am not surprised to see this kind of behavior from "liberals" like you. Regarding US democracy, you, like most US politicians are trying to sit on several chairs. When it fits your agenda, it's a democracy, when it's not, it's something else. I hear "democracy" from Obama all the time as well as promotion of "democracy" around the world in a forms of NATO invasions and murders. So, you didn't' answer the question, why such a hypocrisy? You can refer to some laws and constitution zillions of times, but if they don't make sense as I proved above, then they shouldn't be there. And constitution is not a law book. I don't see there anything what would forbid me to express myself. So, I don't see that it's relevant at all.
If common sense is logic, then your post lacks both. Laws are supposed to serve everyone equally, not just the majority (remembers the Declaration of Independence? All men are created equal?). Please answer these questions: If a gay person wanted to move in next to you, what would you like to happen, in a perfect world? If you were up for a job that you really wanted and the employer refused to hire you because of your homophobic views, would that be ok with your views? Where is it said tolerating others is sadomasochism? As I have pointed out before, not liking someone is not the same as discrimination. Basing your actions toward someone on the fact they are black, gay, jewish, christian, atheist, muslim or white and not on the individual is discrimination. Agree with him all you want. He is wrong. Please give me specifics where you are being forced to tolerate someone you don't like? I would like to know who is forcing you, what they are forcing you to do (or not do) and what group you are forced to tolerate? Also, please give evidence that living in a culturally diverse community decreases harmony and living in a homogeneous society increases harmony. And I am not suggesting a society with suppressed feelings. Yell and scream you hate gays all you want, it is your Constitutional right. Write letters to the editor or post comments on a forum, it is all up to you. However, be aware that other people have the same right to express themselves and to yell and scream how they think you are a homophobe and to write letters to the editor and post comments on a forum. As I have shown in a previous post, putting people in jail is NOT unconstitutional. Show me where in the Constitution it says otherwise. I never said we live in a democracy. I've actually made several statements to the contrary. You are the one who keeps saying we live in a democracy in an attempt at some kind of straw man, which is why I refuse to answer the question, it is meaningless since we do not live in a democracy and I've never said I think we should force our agenda on other countries. And the Constitution is not a law book, it is THE law book that all our other laws are based.
Exactly, this is what I am trying to point, they should serve equally to ALL, not when "gay rights and acceptance" is forced, people should also have a right to isolate themselves from it, if they don't like it by forming their own gay-propaganda free communities. You starting offending me again. If proves that your logic is weak or has none. Want to note that, you starting offenses again. 1) In a perfect world I would choose a state, town, etc where gay propaganda is outlawed. So it wouldn't happen. But if it would, I would report it and he would be fined. 2) Yes. I would be even happy to be told that. In my perfect world I would go to a company which is matching to my views. Why should I suffer being in wrong environment and create tensions? 3) Toleration is suffering, because toleration means that you don't like something, but have to deal with it, right? Offering people suffering or making yourself to suffer it a sadomasochism. Don't understand what you are trying to explain. I have a right to dislike everything, anything, etc. You talking about freedom and at the same time not allowing me to dislike someone, because it will be a "discrimination", you are sitting on a 2 chairs again. Double standards? He is 100% right. Disagree with him all you want, I don't care. But it sounds like you really care what I think, right? You seems like very nervous with my views, since you are going after me, not me after you. I was explaining it all the time, please go back and reread my posts. You are writing this response, which actually contains the answer, this is really weird and looks like a mockery. Regarding the putting people in jail you didn't say really anything, you just said that without any referral. There is nothing that people should be in jail for expressing themselves, how can I give you a referral? Like I said earlier, if people are put into jail and and it's not unconstitutional, even you confirm it, then why forming gay - propaganda - free communities is unconstitutional?! People are being put into jail, because most people don't want to see them around, right? Gay propaganda - free communities is pretty much the same, but much less restrictive. So, it should be 100% constitutional, right? So, I am here to promote democracy in USA, like I see on a TV, Obama, etc. like USA wants to promote it around the world. Then why USA is so wanting promotion of democracy around the world, when it's not a democracy according to you? Double standards? 2 chairs again? Hypocrisy? My point is examine a validity of some law and question it. Do you agree that we need a law, which beneficial to a majority of the people? Answer this question. If not, then we don't need it. Then it's a tyranny and oppression, since it don't make happy majority of the population. It's just a common sense. This is why I am suggesting to have a law, which would not outlaw homos, but would not oppress other part of population, which finds this phenomenon disgusting, to form their own communities and isolate themselves from what they don't like. If you use constitution and laws to justify oppression of majority of people in US, then you are a tyrant. You are still failing to present me links which support your case, because you know they support my case as well. Here is for you whole constitution: http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
The only way you can control the people who live around you is to literally buy an island and be the only person on it. You cannot control who lives next door, unless you're prepared to buy the property yourself. While that is a valid option, unless you're Bill Gates, eventually the finances required are going to become a problem. Sorry. Your only other option is suicide.
I honestly don't see any point to refer to constitution and the law. Common sense and logic are above them. Laws, constitution are there to serve the interest of majority of the people with respect to minority. If they don't, then it's an oppression. "Founding fathers" are not Gods and can make mistakes, as well as the world moves forward. Just state your point from a view of common sense, like I stated.
That is an utterly stupid, bizarre and perverse understanding of the constitution. The constitution is supposed to protect the minority.
How are you forced to be around gay people? You want to fine people who being gay? So you want to create ghettos??????? you know the same could be said for you Your idea of freedom is to put people into ghettos?
Truthfully, I don't give a rats fuzzy rear end if I offend you or not. You offend me. So what? If you don't want to be offended, get off the Internet, it is the most offensive place I know of. 1) So you don't believe in freedom of speech, or maybe you just don't believe gays should have freedom of speech? 2) But what if all the good paying companies had strict anti-discrimination policies? Would you be fine with working at a minimum wage job because that is was the only one with matching views? 3) Toleration is part of life. Hate to tell you this, but you are going to have to deal with people you don't like all your life. It is part of growing up. I never said you couldn't dislike someone. You CAN dislike someone all you want. The government cannot control your thoughts and emotions, however, they have the right to control your actions. If you injure someone that you dislike, that is called assault. If you refuse to sell something to someone, hire them or let them have the same right because they belong to a group you hate, that is discrimination. Double standards is what you are dealing in. Your views do make me nervous. Actually the scare the hell out of me. You are willing to take away people's rights just to aleve your discomfort. That is scary. I am concerned over your education, it seems to be lacking. People are not put in jail for "expressing themselves" or because people don't want to see them around, they are put in jail because they BROKE THE LAW. Gay propaganda is not illegal, and in fact is protected by the First Amendment as free speech. So unless you think the First Amendment should be stricken from the Constitution, get off of the whole jail thing, it's a crappy analogy. Turn off the TV and pick up a book on politics, it will be enlightening. Plus, when did politicians become experts on anything. They just say crap to get voted in the next election. I disagree that we need a laws the benefit the majority of the people, we need laws the benefit ALL the people, however, happiness is not guaranteed in the Constitution. The Declaration of Independence says we have the right to Pursue Happiness, but it never says we have to be happy. Also, I've seen too much misinformation disguised as common sense to put any trust in it. Ok, so what is this law that you think should be passed. What does it do? Who does it affect? What are the punishments for breaking this law. Actually you have the burden of proof since you are the one who is putting the forward the idea that the laws should be changed, but out of courtesy and hoping that you will learn something, here are some links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_v._Board_of_Education http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=480&invol=616 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Windsor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Windsor
As I said in my other post, I don't trust common sense, it is overrated and prone to misinformation. A scientists do not use common sense to come up with a theory (quantum physics wouldn't exist if that was the case). Also, as I said in my other post, the Constitution and laws are here to serve the interest of all the people, not just the majority. Of course there will come times when the rights of one affects the rights of another. In those cases, the law that benefits society the most should take precedence. After re-reading your post, I have a question that I think would get to the core of this argument. What is it about gays that offend you?
This line of reasoning is rather bizarre. Somehow somebody's rights ate being violated because the world exists? Seems to me people that have an issue with being around the public suffer from a personal condition. Basically put, it's not my circus and they are not my monkeys.
If you are disturbed with what I am saying and you do, since you started all of this, closed the browser and go watch CNN. 1) My freedom is to be free from your forms of freedom. So, I believe in freedom. My freedom goes against yours. 2) You are offering me to sell my views for a better pay??? 3) Why suffer tolerating something, if there is a way to avoid it. If someone puts you on fire and there is a way out, you will stay there? Grow up. Why you again brought the violence? Did I ever said about hurting someone physically? Government does keep trying to control my thoughts, emotions with allowing gay propaganda and hunting the opposition. Government does forces me to like gays by forcing me to hire them. Government does forbids me to dislike gays, calling it "discrimination". Still don't understand how I am taking somebodies rights away. Right now my rights are taken, as stated by Ran Paul by forced integration. You are forcing me to be around people I don't like and suffer tolerating just to aleve your discomfort, that someone might openly dislike you because you are gay. I am more concerted about how you twist things to push your agenda. There are laws which forbid certain types of self expression. Lets say, I don't like gays and I don't want to hire them. Law forbids this type of self expression. So, this law violates my constitutional rights. Or, as you know, Snowden expressed himself by revealing the violation of Constitution by government and he should go to jail, because there is a law, which forbids this type of self expression. So, people are still going to jail for expressing themselves, right?! And people who as disgusted with "gay rights" simply can't express themselves by isolating themselves from something this dislike? Why don't you kick yourself out from political life, you are the expert number one and you, DarkDaimon, know everything and superior to everybody. I am fighting for democracy against tyranny, where US leads and I think the right things is to start from US first, before promoting it to others. You sound utopic and very naive, there are very rarely a law, which would benefit all people, there are over 300 million in US. So, your answer doesn't count. So, do you agree that we need a law, which beneficial to a majority of the people? I do pursue happiness, I want to live in a society with like-minded people and stay away from people I don't like. You don't believe in yourself or your own logical opinion? You are chronically refereeing to someone or something else, like Constitution says this, who said what, law says that, etc. Do you have your own head at all?! I want to see a real man in you, sounds like you can't prove anything using his own head... The law, which would allow people to be themselves, express themselves, be with their own kind, on a way how you call being "homophobic" (disrespecting us by giving a medial diagnoses as "phobia"), have our own place, stay away from all this "gay" stuff. Punishment for braking the law is a fine. Oh, thank you, man, you giving me a courtesy of supporting yourself! But it's not what I asked. I asked when you saying something, like "It's in a First Amendment", copy the part of the text which supports you and give a link to prove that it's there, like I did for you with Ron Paul, so that it would be clear what exactly you mean. Of course, if you care to be understood correctly. I looked through them and I am not sure what part of that huge texts you are referring to. But whatever is done by supreme court, by Brown, Founding father or any other kind is not done by ways of democracy as referendum, support of majority of US population, thus doesn't make sense, or at least should be questioned. If someone acts tyrannically and imposes some law upon majority population without asking, I clearly disrespect it. How do you know what is misinformation and what is not? Common sense is logic. Saying that "it's serving all" people it's naive and stupid, its a utopia, as I said. It should be beneficial to majority of the society. I am lost with such things as "benefits society the most", because in order to find out how it benefits, you need to ask everyone in a society, how it's benefits to him/her and if majority says "yes", then it's benefits to society, if not - then not. So, you are in the same time disagreeing with me that it should benefit to majority and in the same time, you agree, attempting to sit on 2 chairs again. How it affect straight people I already said in my 1st and 2nd post in this thread.
I am trying to understand what you are trying to prove me? Homos always trying to bulshi*t me with constitution, but let make it clear. Using the constitution, I am expressing myself that I want to be with people like myself and free from all the gay stuff. And you saying that it's unconstitutional, where you are obviously wrong, because I have a right of self expression as well. So, what is the point now? Laws are definitely go against constitution, because they suppress my self expression, like there are laws prohibiting any way to avoid dealing with people I don't like. Since people like me are expressing themselves that they don't want to be around people like you, you saying that we are taking away your constitutional rights?! Then question is why you would want to be around people who dislike you? Why you are forcing acceptance? Right now to resolve it, laws force people to shut their mouths and tolerate(suffer) being around you! Please answer it. What we have now doesn't make any sense, common sense, logic and its not leading to happiness and completely unconstitutional. Thanks that constitution allows me to pursue happiness, OMG!
Well, I think the point is getting lost, so let me restate my position: The government is not forcing you to tolerate anyone. If you believe otherwise, please give details on how YOU, personally, have been affected. People can live anywhere they want as long as they can afford it, we are not Communists. People can say whatever they want, we have Free Speech. The majority of people support same-sex marriage (59% as of this February Wall Street Journal Poll) You are free to say whatever you want about gays, but be prepared for others to use their free speech to say what they want about you. It is only fair. Common sense is not the same a logic. From Wikipedia "Common sense is a basic ability to perceive, understand, and judge things, which is shared by ("common to") nearly all people, and can be reasonably expected of nearly all people without any need for debate." Everything can be debated, just cruise the Conspiracy section.
>The government is not forcing you to tolerate anyone. If you believe otherwise, please give details on how YOU, personally, have been affected. I already told you that it's not. Why then there are laws against "homophobia"? These laws suppress self expression. Sounds like you are going to perform on me a session of physiotherapy - "Oh! Maybe I am gay and suppressing myself". I already explained in my first and second post how it makes none-gay people inferior to gay, for example, at work. It's disturbing, I don't want to be in such situation. And I find all these "gay issues" simply disgusting. They make me puke. I don't go to gay bars, I don't read gay magazines, I don't watch gay channels, but they keep trying to force me "tolerance" and love towards them in all other remaining parts of informational stream or "help me to discover a gay in me". It makes me puke, really. And don't tell me these usual idiotic things - close browser, don't watch TV, move to Saudi Arabia, etc. I want to live here, in a society where is no such things as "gay stuff". And just recent example-I ordered a Heineken beer in a regular bar. A woman nearby throwed, so that I could hear: "why all these gays are drinking Heineken?". It made me upset, because I am not gay. I also don't want to be approached and seeing these people around myself. It makes me puke. How gays are personally affected of being gay? People brake into their bedrooms, not letting do what they want to do? So, they also don't want to live in a closet, don't they?! >People can live anywhere they want as long as they can afford it, we are not Communists. No, they can't. Laws do allow people to isolate themselves from people they don't like, like putting them into prison. If we already have such system under such constitution, why then people who dislike homos can't live in gay propaganda free towns, states, etc? Note, its not gay-free on a physical way and you are not denied to have the same society, what is actually a mirror of the society as we have now - "homophobia" is outlawed vs pro-gay propaganda is outlawed. So, right now, people like me are living in the condition, which homophiles are calling "unconstitutional", when I am applying the same condition to them - society with outlawed gay propaganda. So, you are nervous like I want to take away somebodies rights, while you already have taken mine?! Ron Paul also sees that and calls it unconstitutional, a current society with forced integration. >People can say whatever they want, we have Free Speech. No, we don't. People are hunted down for "homophobia" and "racism". Government and mass media is breaking into private companies, fines them and screaming "why you have too many whites, etc". For example, I can't dislike blacks because I might be thought that I am a racist, thus I am forced to deal with them. Although I might dislike them for other reasons then "skin color", as mass media propaganda portray and harasses people for disliking them, especially for attempts to have a white neighborhood. >The majority of people support same-sex marriage (59% as of this February Wall Street Journal Poll) Right, its "under the gun" support - you are "homophobic" if you are against. Like in communist countries, if you against them - you are a "peoples enemy". Years huge pushing of pro-gay propaganda and laws against "gay discrimination" made their own things. You should judge by times or places when or where there was none of pro-gay propaganda. Of you should run both at the same time. Then I would look at the results! And look, anti-gay crimes are only rising as a reaction, because in reality many people find it disgusting. http://www.darkpolitricks.com/2014/02/the-truthseeker-bag-a-fg-a-silent-us-anti-gay-epidemic-e34/ US mass media, which is build on who pays more, perverts the facts, as expected. >You are free to say whatever you want about gays, but be prepared for others to use their free speech to say what they want about you. It is only fair. I am not interested living in a society of hate. This is why I am proposing to have an alternative societies, where you have choice whom to join. You are free, I am free. >Common sense is not the same a logic. From Wikipedia "Common sense is a basic ability to perceive, understand, and judge things, which is shared by ("common to") nearly all people, and can be reasonably expected of nearly all people without any need for debate." Everything can be debated, just cruise the Conspiracy section. Common sense is build on logic. It's huge page about what it is, but as for me common sense = logic. This is the way I like it, if you don't like it, I don't care. Do you mind answering questions I asked in http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=387122&p=1064825111#post1064825111? And why you are against giving people freedom to isolate themselves from something they find disgusting to themselves? People should be free and no any constitution, law, etc shouldn't dictate people whom to like and what to think, since it seems like we don't live in communism. People should have a right to like AND dislike others for religion, sexual orientation, race, gender and whatever. This is what I call a freedom, far not what we have now.
I don't feel that there should be any anger towards the LGBT community for wanting to reach a point where they feel truly equal. Just because they are given the ability to marry, doesn't mean that they are welcomed by the society around them for being who they are. There will be people who will probably always be against the idea of same sex marriage, and then there will be those who feel it should be legalized but they themselves are not entirely comfortable with seeing it. But then finally there are those who either push for these rights because they fall into the category of people who need this legalized to live the life they want to or others who just feel that they should be accepted just as anyone. Our country is definitely starting to acknowledge the legalization more and states are starting to allow the marriage of the LGBT community, however they still may not feel entirely equal because of those who do not accept them. So until these individuals have a feeling of security with being who they are as an equal person, they will of course want and act to get that respect.
