Close
Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234567813 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 150
  1. #21
    Machine Gunner Madeinhb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Thornton
    Posts
    1,218

    Default DOMA/Prop 8 decisions

    Quote Originally Posted by RblDiver View Post
    Indeed, we should just go to a flat sales tax instead of income tax and get the gov't out of marriage. Of course, this should include the right of people to decline that which goes against their beliefs; if a baker doesn't want to make a "wedding" cake for a gay couple, let 'em, don't let them be sued!

    My bigger concern for the future, though, is that standing issue I mentioned earlier. If the state won't defend it, who can?
    They have the right to refuse service.

  2. #22
    Varmiteer
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hayden, COLORADO
    Posts
    607

    Default

    Why does the State have to insert itself into marriage? All marrage is, as it pertains the the State, is a bundle of contracts. Why should you be restricted in contracting to who you want ?

    You want to get Married, go to a church.

  3. #23
    Machine Gunner RblDiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Longmont
    Posts
    2,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Madeinhb View Post
    They have the right to refuse service.
    There's a lawsuit going on where the couple is suing the baker for discrimination. That's what I'm against.


    Edit (so I'm not just increasing my postcount even more lol): The first part of this article says what I'm most worried about, that the people's decisions don't mean jack if the state disagrees: http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/2...ferendums-now/
    Last edited by RblDiver; 06-26-2013 at 12:24.

  4. #24
    Machine Gunner Madeinhb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Thornton
    Posts
    1,218

    Default DOMA/Prop 8 decisions

    Quote Originally Posted by RblDiver View Post
    There's a lawsuit going on where the couple is suing the baker for discrimination. That's what I'm against.


    Edit (so I'm not just increasing my postcount even more lol): The first part of this article says what I'm most worried about, that the people's decisions don't mean jack if the state disagrees: http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/2...ferendums-now/
    They might sue over it, but it's a he said she said debate. Baker could just say that he is busy and won't be able to make the cake. I don't see how a court can force/dictate a business who they can do business with.

  5. #25
    Machine Gunner RblDiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Longmont
    Posts
    2,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Madeinhb View Post
    They might sue over it, but it's a he said she said debate. Baker could just say that he is busy and won't be able to make the cake. I don't see how a court can force/dictate a business who they can do business with.
    Well, for example the, what is it called, Federal Fair Housing Act or somesuch, you can't discriminate who you rent to, etc. I'm sure they'll argue it along these sorts of lines.

  6. #26
    .
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Florissant
    Posts
    4,380

    Default

    From:
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...-incompatible/

    ...

    - A Methodist church in New Jersey was sued for not offering its facility for use during same-sex weddings. A judge ruled against the church.
    - A same-sex couple from California sued a Hawaiian bed and breakfast privately owned by a Christian woman for not allowing them to rent a room.
    - A bed and breakfast in Alton privately owned by a Christian couple was sued when they would not host a same-sex civil union ceremony.
    - Owners of a small, privately owned inn in Vermont declined to host a same sex wedding reception due to their religious views and were sued.
    - An employee of Allstate insurance wrote an essay online disagreeing with same-sex marriage and was reportedly fired from his job as a result.
    - Catholic Charities was barred from assisting in adoptions in Massachusetts, Washington, D.C., and Illinois and excluded from future contracts because it declined to consider same sex couples. Sorry kids, but the agenda impresarios need to make an example.
    There are even more examples. The fight has only just begun. Might as well stop trying to convince yourself it hasn't.


  7. #27

    Default

    Lord have mercy, we are toast... Man has no business trying to "redefine" what he didn't create. The current is gaining strength...
    http://disciplejourney.com

    Make men large and strong and tyranny will bankrupt itself in making shackles for them.” – Rev. Henry Ward Beecher (1813-1887) US Abolitionist Preacher

    CIPCIP

  8. #28
    Paper Hunter ImNtUrBuddyGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    140

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy View Post
    Yeah I can see a enlisted man and his family denied living in military housing because some higher ranking homosexual and his gay lover(spouse) have priority...so the .gov has no say in this? Pretty disgusting to me, but I guess conservative traditionalist are all wrong. So now we are forced to give security clearances to people like Bradley Manning...meanwhile Colorado is burning. The people have elected some real idiots this time around!
    What does Bradley Manning have to do with this? Is it because he is gay? I don't think him being gay has anything to do with him being a traitor.

  9. #29
    .
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Florissant
    Posts
    4,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ImNtUrBuddyGuy View Post
    What does Bradley Manning have to do with this? Is it because he is gay? I don't think him being gay has anything to do with him being a traitor.
    When I was interviewed for my first clearance in '87, there were more questions about homosexuality than anything else.
    They are statistically less mentally stable, and more easily coerced/blackmailed than normal people.

  10. #30
    Paper Hunter ImNtUrBuddyGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    140

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by davsel View Post
    When I was interviewed for my first clearance in '87, there were more questions about homosexuality than anything else.
    They are statistically less mentally stable, and more easily coerced/blackmailed than normal people.
    There are plenty of guys I know in the military who unfortunately have mental issues (PTSD, TBI) who still have their clearance. Straight people are just as easily blackmailed because for other reasons; I knew a few guys who lost their clearance because of extramarital affairs.

    So are you saying combat vets shouldn't get a clearance either?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •