I'm the hardest core liberal you'll ever met. I do not want equality of outcomes. I want equality of the playing field. How do you reconcile your Bizzaro World view of liberals with the living breath example contradicting that view right now?
Dan, the family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
1. Gay Couples are a family and the are successfully raising children. See exhibit A.
2. There is nothing about same-sex marriage that even remotely threatens opposing-sex marriage. How exactly do you think two men who have been lovers for 40 years getting married is going to damage your marriage?
No one has ever called for the state to arrest heterosexual married couples. The argument that legally recognized same-sex marriages is an attack on opposite-sex marriage is as ridiculous and bigoted as the argument that legally recognized interracial marriages are an attack on same-race marriages.
The only thing you people talk about is equality of outcomes
That is such ridiculous bullshit, even from you. No one has ever uttered anything in support of equality of outcomes. If they have, link it.
Fort Wayne cannot support any of his delusional fantasies with actual facts. Of course no one has ever stated that all outcomes should be the same. People have argued that there should be an equal playing ground, a free market, rather than a rigged system.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). See also Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888). To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.
These convictions must be reversed.
It is so ordered.
Replace the word "racial " with the word "gender" and no principle or logic is changed.
The communists of the 30's, David Horowitz's parents and their associates, adopted the name "Progressives" to disguise their purpose which was world domination by the Soviet Union and it remains so today even though the system has been thorougly discredited.
No sane person today thinks progressivism has anything to do with communism or the Soviet Union. The meaning of progressivism and the progressive movement is taught in every fifth grade history class. If you are confused, that's on you.
But freedom of religion is in the constitution, homosexuality is not.
We could always amend the Constitution to revoke the protection of religion. In any case, the Constitution does not have to mention homosexuality. It does not mention heterosexual marriage, but the case of Loving V. Virginia stated unequivocally that all laws prohibiting a white man and a black woman from marrying each other were unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. You have not and cannot address this fact.
Your opinion is bigoted because you and your homosexual friends are anti-human.
Yeah, nothing bigoted or anti-human about the above statement.
To all the people defending Christianity, how do you reconcile that with the example of FortWayne? Why should we tolerate religion when the religious try to use state-sponsored violence to enforce their bigoted and vile vision of the world upon others?
Here's the deal - the same people who lecture us about the need for security and snooping in all our phone calls and emails, and trying to restrict encryption, refuse to follow the procedures for basic email security with highly classified programs.
Wouldn't matter if they did. Backdoors for our government are also backdoors for all the foreign governments, terrorists, and criminals in the world, and luckily also for whistle blowers.
Now Iowa has a lousy record for picking the winners, but if a candidate is at the bottom of the pool by the time the Iowa caucuses are done, then it's basically over for him since the primary elections have begun. The next four months are critical. It's during this time that most people will decide who they want to be president.
Surprisingly Bernie Sanders has done extremely well against Hilary Clinton. She was considered inevitable for the past four years and right now Sanders and Hilary are neck-in-neck. Sanders has a good chance of defeating her despite having spent a tiny fraction of the money she has, and all of his donors are average Americans not big corporations.
Everything is wrong with promoting drugs, once you grow past the rebelling teenage years you'll understand.
You do realize that pharmaceutical is just a fancy marketing term for drugs, right?
There is nothing special about illegal drugs other than that they are illegal, mostly for political reasons. Legal drugs are just as dangerous and often more. People die from these marketed drugs. People don't die from pot.
We license guns, boats, driving, fishing, catching lobster, even barbers. Why isn't something as important as parenthood licensed? Well, of course, there are just fears that anyone with the power to prevent people from reproducing will abuse that power. But as several threads recently posted demonstrate, there are severe problems with letting unqualified and unprepared people reproduce. A license, a financial stability requirement, and completion of parental training seem pretty reasonable for the most important job you'll ever have. With 7+ billion people on the planet, we don't need more parents. We need better parents.
I guess the health reasons don't seem to matter, Dan ignores info that is inconvenient. Back to that selective hearing again champ?
Marriage is bad for health? Yep, being able to file taxes jointly causes cancer.
You do realize that everybody has sex without getting married. Any health concerns you have -- which are bullshit anyway -- don't apply to the legal institution that is marriage. Are you really so fucking stupid to think that gay men are going to have any less sex because the state doesn't let them marry?
Liberal media promotes homosexuality, drugs, and stupid behavior quite often.
1. There is nothing wrong with promoting homosexuality. It's not evil like Christianity is.
2. Liberals don't promote homosexuality. We promote civil rights for all including gays.
3. There is nothing wrong with promoting drugs. Have you seen a t.v. commercial in the past 40 years. Drugs are promoted all the time.
4. Promoting an end to the war on drugs and the legalization of pot isn't promoting drugs. It's opposing unjust laws that do harm but no good.
5. Anyone who thinks that Trump is qualified to have the nuclear codes does not get to talk about stupid behavior.