Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 789101112 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 172

Thread: Keith Olbermann goes off on Prop 8.. you can feel the fury coming off him

  1. #151
    Hit By Ban Bus! AliceInWonderland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    you already know.
    Posts
    44,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    See, up here the Fed just said gay marriage is legal across all provinces, and that was that, once parliament passed it.

    Why do states require different marriage rules? It's so.. inefficient
    b/c (and i know this from my schooling of american history) the united states were set up to have states have a certain amount of power and to not be all controlled and shit by the federal govt. its an american thing, you wouldn't understand

  2. #152
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    Seems vastly troublesome.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  3. #153
    Elite Member nana55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dreaming about being on a lake in Ontario
    Posts
    4,084

    Default

    I have many friends with different ideas. However I no longer have "close" friends who are bigoted. I realize if they are bigoted there is very little we will have in common so I let the friendships drift.
    If I can't be a good example, then let me be a horrible warning.

  4. #154
    Elite Member Lobelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    a backwards hillbilly state
    Posts
    20,800

    Default

    Yeah, we had a little quarrel in the 1800's over it...
    "I've cautiously embraced jeggings"
    Emma Peel aka Pacific Breeze aka Wilde1 aka gogodancer aka maribou

    Yip, yip, yip in your tiny indignation. Bark furiously on, lady dog.

  5. #155
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    A marriage from a state in which age requirements were met to be married will be recognized by all fifty states.
    Hello? DoMA?

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    A gay marriage will not, regardless of the requirements being met in the state in which the marriage was created. That argument illustrates a difference in policy pertaining to a situation which both states find legal. It's no different from driver's licenses. In one state the legal age to obtain the driver's license may be sixteen, while a fifteen year old in another state is legally licensed and allowed to drive legally in both. This situation involves states which have written into law that said situation is illegal. Different situations.
    Bullshit. Common law marriages aren't recognized state to state.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    It is a state issue now. I assure you, the first gay couple who find themselves in a state, in which their marriage is not even recognized, and rights they would have if it were recognized aren't given to them, it won't be a state issue anymore.
    Again, DoMA. Federal law does not require states to recognize same-sex marriages from another state.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    Are all gays going to move to California, assuming Prop 8 is found unconstitutional, and stay there permanently?
    Wouldn't they want to move to Connecticut, Massachusetts or New York first?
    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    Will any gay couple who find their rights being, nulled just by entering another state, accept the situation? Will the state refusing them rights concede its law and say,"Even though it is illegal here, we'll let you slide?" No.
    Again, DoMA. If state law doesn't require it, they don't have to.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    That is when it will become more than one state's issue. Who do you think steps in to decide which state's law will override the other's in a case of state law conflict? Loving versus Virginia is a good case to take a look at to understand what happens when two states don't quite agree and why your statement, and argument, of this being strictly a state issue is off, unless being able to fully marry in one state is acceptable.
    Do you even know what the Defense of Marriage Act is? It was passed in '96 and specifically states that states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages accepted in another state.

  6. #156
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    that shit needs to be repealed, STAT
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  7. #157
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    ^I know. I know...

  8. #158
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    and clinton then needs to be slapped for ever being near it

    stupid shitbag
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  9. #159
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    ^Unsurprisingly, he signed it in his reelection year.

  10. #160
    Elite Member RevellingInSane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Where Being PC is understood as a fault!
    Posts
    11,591

    Default

    Fluffy, you just proved my point. At some point the federal government would have to step in. You use a federal statute to explain why the federal government would not have to take action eventually to ensure gays have some form of civil partnership in every state? How Palin.

    What part of this is zooming over your head? Whether it is DoMA being repealed or rewritten, at some point national government would have to be brought into the fracas, unless gay rights activists in this country will accept their unions being worthless in some states, or go through each state which doesn't recognize same-sex marriages, and change it on an individual basis. Some states will be dead set against that and nothing will change.

    I know what DoMA, a federal level statue, is. Understand the different levels and what is required before you try to explain it. The very statute you keep throwing around also allows federal level entities to ignore same sex marriages, meaning that law alone would limit recognition to within state borders and within the borders of states which choose to acknowledge the union.

    Seriously, who the hell said anything about common law marriages? This issue is focusing on licensed marriages, not shacking up for seven years, or whatever the length of time is in a certain jurisdiction.

    You truly don't understand the long term ripples, as you have proven by your posts. If this is truly a civil rights issue, that alone indicates the need to go above state constitutions.

    DoMA is standing in the way. No state can repeal it. States can use it to ignore gay unions.

    How is this strictly a state issue again unless gays are willing to happily accept marriages recognized in a small number of states? Do you want this recognized across the country, whether each state likes it or not, or in the odd state?

    Individual states? Willing to accept that? State issue?

    Recognition throughout the country? DoMA must go. Federal Act. Federal intervention required.

    Dismissed.

    Enough time has been spent on this. The voting public spoke. They shot it down. DoMA doesn't require California, or any other state, to recognize same-sex marriage and the voters chose to not recognize. DONE!

    *walks away from dead horse as it is still being clubbed*
    Last edited by RevellingInSane; November 13th, 2008 at 07:07 PM.



  11. #161
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    Oooo, ITS ON!

    *hands out acrylic nails*
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  12. #162
    Elite Member Penny Lane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Over the hills and far away
    Posts
    21,646

    Default

    Here's a searchable database of Prop 8 contributors..

    Proposition 8 Contributions

    ETA: Vanilla Pitt donated 100K..
    Last edited by Penny Lane; November 13th, 2008 at 07:19 PM.

  13. #163
    Hit By Ban Bus!
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    379

    Default

    What? Brad Pitt donated 100 thousand to what?

  14. #164
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flipstick View Post
    What? Brad Pitt donated 100 thousand to what?
    Against Prop 8.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    Fluffy, you just proved my point. At some point the federal government would have to step in. You use a federal statute to explain why the federal government would not have to take action eventually to ensure gays have some form of civil partnership in every state? How Palin.
    I've been stating the law as it currently stands. Not how I think it should be. You seem to be assuming that the federal government is going to jump in and save the day for gays across the US and let them all be married. Why you do so, I don't really understand because it ain't gonna happen. Your Palin reference makes no sense since Palin has never demonstrated the ability to acknowledge federal law or policy.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    What part of this is zooming over your head? Whether it is DoMA being repealed or rewritten, at some point national government would have to be brought into the fracas, unless gay rights activists in this country will accept their unions being worthless in some states, or go through each state which doesn't recognize same-sex marriages, and change it on an individual basis. Some states will be dead set against that and nothing will change.
    None of it is going over my head, but you seem to be envisioning a Supreme Court case like Loving vs. Virginia in favor of gay marriage. Guess what? There's several Supreme Court justices like Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts in your way. You don't think Scalia will start questioning (however ridiculously) those in favor of gay marriage about polygamy and other marriage standards? That is, if a court case would even make it to the Supreme Court as I mentioned up thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    I know what DoMA, a federal level statue, is. Understand the different levels and what is required before you try to explain it. The very statute you keep throwing around also allows federal level entities to ignore same sex marriages, meaning that law alone would limit recognition to within state borders and within the borders of states which choose to acknowledge the union.
    Really? You really know what DoMA is? Because when I read this:
    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    It is a state issue now. I assure you, the first gay couple who find themselves in a state, in which their marriage is not even recognized, and rights they would have if it were recognized aren't given to them, it won't be a state issue anymore.

    Are all gays going to move to California, assuming Prop 8 is found unconstitutional, and stay there permanently? Will any gay couple who find their rights being, nulled just by entering another state, accept the situation? Will the state refusing them rights concede its law and say,"Even though it is illegal here, we'll let you slide?" No.
    This doesn't sound like someone who knows what DoMA is. This sounds like someone who has never heard of DoMA and thinks that a Supreme Court case will right the wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    Seriously, who the hell said anything about common law marriages? This issue is focusing on licensed marriages, not shacking up for seven years, or whatever the length of time is in a certain jurisdiction.
    You said that any marriage is recognized by any other state; just proof that it's not.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    You truly don't understand the long term ripples, as you have proven by your posts.
    The long term ripples? WTF?
    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    If this is truly a civil rights issue, that alone indicates the need to go above state constitutions.
    I totally believe that gays should be allowed to marry. EVERYWHERE. However, you seem to be forgetting that there is something called states rights. It's gonna be a fucking big hurdle if--IF--a case regarding same-sex marriages makes it to the Supreme Court. Because guess what, every law about marriage would come up for scrutiny. Like Utah's anti-bigamy law. Or waiting periods for marriage licenses. Or having to certify that your prospective spouse and yourself have had an AIDS test. All for a marriage license. Yes, I agree that gays should have the right to marry and get divorced like the rest of us. But there is something called states' rights in the Constitution. Stop acting like a Supreme Court case is going to automatically happen. Because the justices that are currently on the court will have their own religious reservations about gays getting married.
    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    DoMA is standing in the way. No state can repeal it. States can use it to ignore gay unions.
    No shit. I said that previously.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    How is this strictly a state issue again unless gays are willing to happily accept marriages recognized in a small number of states? Do you want this recognized across the country, whether each state likes it or not, or in the odd state?

    Individual states? Willing to accept that? State issue?
    How is this a state issue? Gee, are states allowed to set legal limits for anything they recognize? Because as YOU mentioned, states do set legal age requirements for marriage, which means states get to set a legal requirement for licenses they issue. Just like driver's licenses. Why wouldn't states have the right to determine the limits of marriages within their borders? Guess that means all those age limits can go bye-bye. And the Mormons can publicly embrace polygamy once again.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    Recognition throughout the country? DoMA must go. Federal Act. Federal intervention required.

    Dismissed.
    I said this up thread...

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    Enough time has been spent on this.
    I think there should be more.
    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    The voting public spoke. They shot it down.
    Barely.
    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    DoMA doesn't require California, or any other state, to recognize same-sex marriage and the voters chose to not recognize. DONE!
    You must enjoy being redundant.

    Quote Originally Posted by RevellingInSane View Post
    *walks away from dead horse as it is still being clubbed*
    *starts filling out IRS complaint against the LDS church*
    Last edited by Tati; November 13th, 2008 at 09:52 PM.

  15. #165
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    Your Palin reference makes no sense since Palin has never demonstrated the ability to acknowledge federal law or policy.
    *snort* Any shot at Palin is fun
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 789101112 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Tom Brokaw: Chris Matthews & Keith Olbermann have gone too far
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: August 29th, 2008, 09:28 AM
  2. Keith Olbermann and Glenn Greenwald feud over FISA
    By witchcurlgirl in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: June 27th, 2008, 02:15 PM
  3. Keith Olbermann throws fit over ketchup?
    By mrs.v in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: June 26th, 2008, 08:21 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: November 14th, 2007, 07:11 PM
  5. Olbermann completely skewers O'Reilly.
    By ohmygoodness in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: February 3rd, 2006, 01:58 AM

Posting Permissions

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