jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Jun 26, 2015 21:48:22 GMT -5
In anticipation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage, some Michigan lawmakers have proposed a set of bills that could road-block same-sex couples seeking to marry.
This week, state Rep. Todd Courser, R-Lapeer, introduced three House bills that would end government involvement in performing weddings and require that all marriage certificates be signed by a religious leader. www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/michigan/2015/06/19/gay-marriage-legislation-religion-michian/29018125/
Wow! just....wow! Talk about sour grapes. "It may legal for them to get married, but we're going to make it very, very difficult for them because....uh...um....God."
"trap law" logic. make abortions harder. make voting harder. make marriage harder. i think these laws will be declared unconstitutional. you can't require someone to sign their name to something they disagree with. No but apparently you can force them to buy a product that is overly inflated in price, even though others get it at a discounted price...and that's backed by the Supreme Court!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 26, 2015 21:57:47 GMT -5
"trap law" logic. make abortions harder. make voting harder. make marriage harder. i think these laws will be declared unconstitutional. you can't require someone to sign their name to something they disagree with. No but apparently you can force them to buy a product that is overly inflated in price, even though others get it at a discounted price...and that's backed by the Supreme Court! barking up the wrong tree, dude. i am not going to defend the ACA. but don't blame a liberal for that. the original law wasn't written by a liberal, and the guy who decided that the aspect of the law in question was a tax, and therefore constitutional, was also not a liberal. boom.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 26, 2015 21:58:58 GMT -5
Here's the Texas gov'n statement straight from the Office of the Gov'n webpage AUSTIN – Following the Supreme Court’s ruling on same-sex marriage, Governor Greg Abbott today issued a memo to all state agency heads directing them to respect and preserve Texans religious liberties and First Amendment rights. “Texans of all faiths must be absolutely secure in the knowledge that their religious freedom is beyond the reach of government. Renewing and reinforcing that promise is all the more important in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges,” Governor Abbott wrote in the memo. “The government must never pressure a person to abandon or violate his or her sincerely held religious beliefs regarding a topic such as marriage. That sort of religious coercion will never be a ‘compelling governmental interest,’ and it will never be ‘the least restrictive means of furthering that interest.’” Governor Abbott went on to say that, “as government officials, we have a constitutional duty to preserve, protect, and defend the religious liberty of every Texan.” The Governor concluded by writing that this order “applies to any agency decision, including but not limited to granting or denying benefits, managing agency employees, entering or enforcing agency contracts, licensing and permitting decisions, or enforcing state laws and regulations.” gov.texas.gov/news/press-release/21133#.VY3y14yFE7E.facebookeither this person is congenitally stupid, or a liar. possibly both.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,790
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
Member is Online
|
Post by Opti on Jun 26, 2015 22:52:37 GMT -5
Hey - if you had asked me in 2000 or 2001 if I thought that by 2015 we'd have a black president, universal healthcare and marriage equality for gay citizens I would not have believed it. Things can happen quicker than you think . . . Not to be picky... but... you do know we don't have "universal healthcare" yet... right? And with the recent Obamacare ruling, having it just got atpushed back further. Well, one out of three is ... one out of three. Not good.
The Scotus issued a ruling, ruling, and having it happen are two different things. Anyone remember the national guard and one little black girl being walked to school?
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Jun 27, 2015 8:01:13 GMT -5
No but apparently you can force them to buy a product that is overly inflated in price, even though others get it at a discounted price...and that's backed by the Supreme Court! barking up the wrong tree, dude. i am not going to defend the ACA. but don't blame a liberal for that. the original law wasn't written by a liberal, and the guy who decided that the aspect of the law in question was a tax, and therefore constitutional, was also not a liberal. boom. Actually it was...only one very small piece of an old Republican legislation was used to make a grand liberal 2000-page pile of shit. If you look up what the Republican plan looked like, you would see it was nothing like the clusterf' that the Dems cooked up.
boom!
|
|
Ombud
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 14, 2013 23:21:04 GMT -5
Posts: 7,593
|
Post by Ombud on Jun 27, 2015 8:17:10 GMT -5
Gay marriage may be legal now, but how about gay adoption? Is that still outlawed? I wasn't aware that it was. Gay couples adopt all the time in California
|
|
jarma
New Member
Joined: Nov 29, 2013 23:03:21 GMT -5
Posts: 19
|
Post by jarma on Jun 27, 2015 8:59:56 GMT -5
Actually I think the MI law just says that judges and other officials can't sign licenses, they would still be issued by the clerks. So apparently MI doesn't care about the religious liberty of the city clerks being cruelly forced to issue pieces of paper. Sounds like someone in Lansing is particularly pissed at my county clerk. She performed the first same sex marriages in the state and today she waived the usual 3-day waiting period for marriage licenses. She was probably performing marriages at 10:15 AM. You go, Barb! Same here. Sort of the epicenter for MI - Wolverine territory.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 27, 2015 12:17:19 GMT -5
Gay marriage may be legal now, but how about gay adoption? Is that still outlawed? I wasn't aware that it was. Gay couples adopt all the time in California From what I understand, many states allow adoption by gay individuals, but not gay couples. I think it's only 16 states which allow adoption by gay couples. We'll see how that changes now.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 18:14:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2015 12:36:17 GMT -5
I'm trying to work out something I want to say. Help me.
Does it makes sense if I say: Losing privilege, is not the same as having one's rights restricted.
Just because you are no longer able to reserve the right to marry to yourselves, does not mean that your religious right is being taken away.
It just means that the privilege you were erroneously granted has been eliminated, so that all may enjoy the same benefit.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Jun 27, 2015 12:47:13 GMT -5
I actually like the above, and it makes perfect sense to me.
I was actually thinking along those lines yesterday, when the Right was freaking the hell out about the SCOTUS decision. I wondered if they feel so attacked, because their religious values have so long been allowed to run roughshod over our civil laws, and now that we are finally pushing back, it feels like their rights and way of life are being threatened.
It has been a form of privilege; this assumption that Christian values are the best values, and therefore should be allowed to guide all our civil laws. Unfortunately it a privelage that is so ingrained, any lessening of the choke-hold is viewed as an attack.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 18:14:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2015 12:50:23 GMT -5
Yes. That's what I'm getting at. I am seeing it over and over. I can even understand the perspective of, almost mourning? a relinquishment of privilege.
But that still does not mean you are being stripped of your rights.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 27, 2015 12:52:12 GMT -5
I'm living in a conservative area even though the newspaper is liberal. The hue and cry has been hysterical. What's funny is that the gay people here still just quietly go about their business like everyone else. Maybe they get married, maybe they don't, but it's no ones business but their own. My one friend with the gay son is all over my FB with it and even listed a picture of her son and his significant other. Said son commented that he didn't want him and his SO on display that way. I actually didn't recognize him because he looked so skinny which made DH ask if he had AIDS. You don't hear a lot about AIDS anymore, do you? Is it cured?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 27, 2015 12:57:07 GMT -5
I'm living in a conservative area even though the newspaper is liberal. The hue and cry has been hysterical. What's funny is that the gay people here still just quietly go about their business like everyone else. Maybe they get married, maybe they don't, but it's no ones business but their own. My one friend with the gay son is all over my FB with it and even listed a picture of her son and his significant other. Said son commented that he didn't want him and his SO on display that way. I actually didn't recognize him because he looked so skinny which made DH ask if he had AIDS. You don't hear a lot about AIDS anymore, do you? Is it cured? My son is very skinny. He's 5'11" and weighs 140. He doesn't have AIDS.
|
|
Robert not Bobby
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 29, 2013 17:45:55 GMT -5
Posts: 1,392
|
Post by Robert not Bobby on Jun 27, 2015 12:59:16 GMT -5
It amazes me that this is still an issues and unsettled? We don't need the SCOUTS to tell us what is right.
Look, I'm a 40 year old guy, completely hetrosexual and I have made disparaging remarks about those who do not make love like I do.
I was wrong.
If two people connect...they connect (It is none of my business what two consenting adult do, or who they chose to love)
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Jun 27, 2015 13:00:53 GMT -5
I'm living in a conservative area even though the newspaper is liberal. The hue and cry has been hysterical. What's funny is that the gay people here still just quietly go about their business like everyone else. Maybe they get married, maybe they don't, but it's no ones business but their own. My one friend with the gay son is all over my FB with it and even listed a picture of her son and his significant other. Said son commented that he didn't want him and his SO on display that way. I actually didn't recognize him because he looked so skinny which made DH ask if he had AIDS. You don't hear a lot about AIDS anymore, do you? Is it cured? This is what cracks me up about the "don't shove it down our throat" argument. For a lot of people that use that argument, gay people no longer hiding is the equivalent of "shoving it down their throat". If that is going to be the measuring stick, and the only way to appease them is to pretend not to exist, then there is no way to win. As much as the small petty part of me finds great glee in the general hysterics and teeth gnashing on the Right, I do try to not gloat openly. I know how annoying that is from the other side. AIDS is not cured, the anti-viral drugs and treatments have gotten much more effective however.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,869
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 27, 2015 13:03:48 GMT -5
DH is even skinnier than he was before the hospital but he looks healthier than my girlfriends son does. That makes me sad. I hope it's just a bad picture. It's not something I feel I can ask.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 18:14:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2015 13:04:49 GMT -5
Yes! Again... on the 'gay people no longer hiding does not = shoving it down other people's throats'....
Another good one. Another aspect of this loss of privilege thing.
I was trying not to gloat yesterday, but I was feeling pretty good
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Jun 27, 2015 13:41:40 GMT -5
Yes! Again... on the 'gay people no longer hiding does not = shoving it down other people's throats'....
Another good one. Another aspect of this loss of privilege thing.
I was trying not to gloat yesterday, but I was feeling pretty good ANd yet somehow having a prayer before a meeting is seen as "shoving religion down the throats" of seculars. But oh well, I guess its just a privelege thing...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 18:14:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2015 14:06:36 GMT -5
I guess it depends on the meeting and expected participation in prayer.
But I don't really see how gays out on the street walking, depicted on TV shows, in books and in the news etc exactly equates to prayer before meetings?
Again... Not having to hide is not = forcing people to practice
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 27, 2015 14:12:48 GMT -5
"trap law" logic. make abortions harder. make voting harder. make marriage harder. i think these laws will be declared unconstitutional. you can't require someone to sign their name to something they disagree with. make owning a gun harder. make saving unborn babies harder. make voting harder.
It looks like both sides engage in this practice .
that is why we have the SCOTUS.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 27, 2015 14:13:34 GMT -5
Yes! Again... on the 'gay people no longer hiding does not = shoving it down other people's throats'....
Another good one. Another aspect of this loss of privilege thing.
I was trying not to gloat yesterday, but I was feeling pretty good ANd yet somehow having a prayer before a meeting is seen as "shoving religion down the throats" of seculars. But oh well, I guess its just a privelege thing... Oh, for heaven's sake! Gay people want the exact same rights everyone else has. If you have a picture of your heterosexual family on your desk or Facebook, is that "shoving heterosexuality down my throat?" You can't possibly compare that to prayer in public. Your ARE shoving your superstitions and beliefs in YOUR particular deity down peoples' throats. You want to pray? Go to church. Nobody is going to stop you.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 27, 2015 14:14:34 GMT -5
barking up the wrong tree, dude. i am not going to defend the ACA. but don't blame a liberal for that. the original law wasn't written by a liberal, and the guy who decided that the aspect of the law in question was a tax, and therefore constitutional, was also not a liberal. boom. Actually it was... actually, it wasn't. the fundamentals of the ACA were adopted from the Massachusetts healthcare law, which was originally conceived by the Heritage Foundation. you would have to be using the term "liberal" as a strictly economic term to get where you just did.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 27, 2015 14:15:35 GMT -5
Sounds like someone in Lansing is particularly pissed at my county clerk. She performed the first same sex marriages in the state and today she waived the usual 3-day waiting period for marriage licenses. She was probably performing marriages at 10:15 AM. You go, Barb! Same here. Sort of the epicenter for MI - Wolverine territory. that is because you have all three branches in Republican control.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 27, 2015 14:16:55 GMT -5
I'm trying to work out something I want to say. Help me.
Does it makes sense if I say: Losing privilege, is not the same as having one's rights restricted.
Just because you are no longer able to reserve the right to marry to yourselves, does not mean that your religious right is being taken away.
It just means that the privilege you were erroneously granted has been eliminated, so that all may enjoy the same benefit. that makes absolute sense. "extending your privilege to others is not the same as losing your rights"
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 27, 2015 14:17:36 GMT -5
Yes. That's what I'm getting at. I am seeing it over and over. I can even understand the perspective of, almost mourning? a relinquishment of privilege.
But that still does not mean you are being stripped of your rights. it is the same callow ruse that racists used to use about Jim Crow and Miscegenation laws.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 27, 2015 14:18:41 GMT -5
I'm living in a conservative area even though the newspaper is liberal. The hue and cry has been hysterical. What's funny is that the gay people here still just quietly go about their business like everyone else. Maybe they get married, maybe they don't, but it's no ones business but their own. My one friend with the gay son is all over my FB with it and even listed a picture of her son and his significant other. Said son commented that he didn't want him and his SO on display that way. I actually didn't recognize him because he looked so skinny which made DH ask if he had AIDS. You don't hear a lot about AIDS anymore, do you? Is it cured? not exactly. but i think it is considered to be "treatable".
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 27, 2015 14:21:42 GMT -5
Yes! Again... on the 'gay people no longer hiding does not = shoving it down other people's throats'....
Another good one. Another aspect of this loss of privilege thing.
I was trying not to gloat yesterday, but I was feeling pretty good ANd yet somehow having a prayer before a meeting is seen as "shoving religion down the throats" of seculars. But oh well, I guess its just a privelege thing... you can pray before any meeting you want. however, it skirts dangerously close to the establishment clause if you do it before a city council meeting.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Jun 27, 2015 14:23:39 GMT -5
Yes! Again... on the 'gay people no longer hiding does not = shoving it down other people's throats'....
Another good one. Another aspect of this loss of privilege thing.
I was trying not to gloat yesterday, but I was feeling pretty good ANd yet somehow having a prayer before a meeting is seen as "shoving religion down the throats" of seculars. But oh well, I guess its just a privelege thing... In your example secularists are probably being expected to be present while the prayer is taking place. So unless gays start demanding that straight people sit in the corner while they have sex..... I don't know of any secular people that would object to people of faith praying together BEFORE a meeting. However, if you only start your prayer after everyone else is present, and therefore force everyone to participate by virtue of their presence...yes, that's a problem.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 27, 2015 14:32:11 GMT -5
ANd yet somehow having a prayer before a meeting is seen as "shoving religion down the throats" of seculars. But oh well, I guess its just a privelege thing... In your example secularists are probably being expected to be present while the prayer is taking place. So unless gays start demanding that straight people sit in the corner while they have sex..... I don't know of any secular people that would object to people of faith praying together BEFORE a meeting. However, if you only start your prayer after everyone else is present, and therefore force everyone to participate by virtue of their presence...yes, that's a problem. The Supreme Court of Canada just ruled that you cannot have prayer at city council meetings. It's a very multi-culti environment. You have Jews and Buddhists and Hindus and atheists at the meetings. so you can't go yammering about your god.
www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/supreme-court-rules-against-prayer-at-city-council-meetings-1.3033595
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 27, 2015 14:35:33 GMT -5
ANd yet somehow having a prayer before a meeting is seen as "shoving religion down the throats" of seculars. But oh well, I guess its just a privelege thing... In your example secularists are probably being expected to be present while the prayer is taking place. So unless gays start demanding that straight people sit in the corner while they have sex..... now THERE is an image for you.
|
|