|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 12:53 AM Original message |
As a heterosexual, my rights have been violated by the passage of Prop 8. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sarah Ibarruri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 12:57 AM Response to Original message |
1. Sounds like there are all kinds of lawsuits that could be coming California's way? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:03 AM Response to Reply #1 |
2. I will happily submit myself to the ACLU, or whatever groups sue the state... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
silverojo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:06 AM Response to Reply #2 |
3. Yeah, where the hell is the ACLU? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Maat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:15 AM Response to Reply #3 |
4. The ACLU, in conjunction with Lambda Legal, and other groups .. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Sarah Ibarruri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 09:42 AM Response to Reply #2 |
16. GOOD! Enough of this right wing extremist American Xian bullshit |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NavyDem (284 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:15 AM Response to Original message |
5. I agree with you completely |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:32 AM Response to Reply #5 |
6. Although I'm not a lawyer... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:20 PM Response to Reply #5 |
39. See my post #38 for another point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alittlelark (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:42 AM Response to Original message |
7. Hubby and I may also have a 'null and void' marriage. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:51 AM Response to Reply #7 |
9. Join the group! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
csziggy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 11:51 AM Response to Reply #9 |
20. If the ACLU needs a hetereo civil union couple in Florida to fight Amendment 2 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 01:38 AM Response to Reply #20 |
26. Exactly! Well said! eom |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mrreowwr_kittty (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:49 AM Response to Original message |
8. Ding. Ding. Ding. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Zhade (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:53 AM Response to Original message |
10. Hmmm. Considering marriage is NOT legally a religious instution... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 01:58 AM Response to Reply #10 |
11. The waters have been considerably muddied. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 08:26 AM Response to Original message |
12. Kicking for further discussion. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MindPilot (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 08:45 AM Response to Original message |
13. Not a lawyer, but I think that argument has merit. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Vickers (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 08:49 AM Response to Original message |
14. This is about the most interesting thread I've read on DU recently. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 01:52 AM Response to Reply #14 |
29. Thanks for the compliment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LeftHander (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 09:27 AM Response to Original message |
15. K&R |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 09:52 AM Response to Original message |
17. K&r |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 10:15 AM Response to Original message |
18. what religion have they established? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 01:43 AM Response to Reply #18 |
27. Take your pick. They inserted a religious tenet into my marriage contract. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 09:10 AM Response to Reply #27 |
31. no...YOU pick it- if you're going to claim that they've established a specific religion... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 09:45 AM Response to Reply #31 |
32. Wrong and wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 10:35 AM Response to Reply #32 |
34. well- there's no arguing with THAT kind of logic... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
123infinity (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 12:40 PM Response to Reply #31 |
37. The First Amendment doesn't specify a particular flavor of religion |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Nov-12-08 08:39 PM Response to Reply #37 |
75. the 1st amendment doesn't specify, because it applies to any and ALL religions... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 11:43 AM Response to Original message |
19. kick |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lumberjack_jeff (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 12:06 PM Response to Original message |
21. Exactly. Car purchases are a sacred institution between a ____ and a ____' |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 01:44 AM Response to Reply #21 |
28. Good example! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
crickets (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 02:26 PM Response to Original message |
22. You make some excellent points. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:13 AM Response to Reply #22 |
30. Me, too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
crickets (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 12:17 PM Response to Reply #30 |
35. I'll kick again for you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Usrename (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 05:33 PM Response to Original message |
23. There ya go. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yardwork (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Nov-10-08 05:44 PM Response to Original message |
24. Thank you for understanding and posting this. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 01:19 AM Response to Reply #24 |
25. You're welcome but... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gorbal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 09:48 AM Response to Original message |
33. It's not only that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
123infinity (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 12:37 PM Response to Original message |
36. That's a fascinating (and pretty darned persuasive) argument! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:18 PM Response to Original message |
38. Here's the problem. Marriage has a definition in this country |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
closeupready (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:24 PM Response to Reply #38 |
41. No offense, but you don't have any idea what you are talking about. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:27 PM Response to Reply #41 |
42. Excuse me, but I know a bit more than some here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:30 PM Response to Reply #38 |
43. Well good thing you aren't a Supreme Court Justice. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:44 PM Response to Reply #43 |
46. They voted to change it back to what it was before the court ruled |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
closeupready (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:49 PM Response to Reply #46 |
49. You have it backwards. You don't "grant" minorities rights. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:52 PM Response to Reply #46 |
51. The Yes Vote was to amend the state constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:12 PM Response to Reply #51 |
61. Well, this is my understanding |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:21 PM Response to Reply #61 |
68. They (I believe) found no impediment to these rights |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BattyDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:43 PM Response to Reply #38 |
45. "The union of a man and a woman" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
closeupready (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:47 PM Response to Reply #45 |
47. I've long argued that same thing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:50 PM Response to Reply #45 |
50. It's complicated. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BattyDem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:00 PM Response to Reply #50 |
57. It's sad that we even have to get into these complex arguments. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
123infinity (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:48 PM Response to Reply #38 |
48. That's nonsense. There was never a standard "legal definition" of marriage |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:56 PM Response to Reply #48 |
53. No, it's not in the constitution |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
123infinity (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:11 PM Response to Reply #53 |
60. Well, you keep bringing up the constitution. Maybe that's what is giving us the idea |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:15 PM Response to Reply #53 |
64. Correct. It is not in the Constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:56 PM Response to Reply #48 |
54. Thank you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:57 PM Response to Reply #54 |
55. It's not a meme |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:58 PM Response to Reply #55 |
56. Post some links. The burden of proof is on you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:06 PM Response to Reply #56 |
58. I imagine you're smart enough to look up the family code in any state you choose |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gollygee (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:09 PM Response to Reply #58 |
59. In your first post, you talked about the Constitution, and now you're talking about state family law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:13 PM Response to Reply #59 |
63. Marriage isn't defined in the constitution! That's the point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:18 PM Response to Reply #63 |
67. It does, I think we are reaching the same point here. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:12 PM Response to Reply #58 |
62. We were talking about the State Constitution. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:17 PM Response to Reply #62 |
66. It is my understanding that the court found a right in the constitution, but |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Starry Messenger (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:23 PM Response to Reply #66 |
70. Right. I've been replying to you in different places, sorry. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:41 PM Response to Reply #70 |
72. Good luck! :) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
gollygee (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:54 PM Response to Reply #38 |
52. People are not devoid of rights until they're granted |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Cleita (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:21 PM Response to Original message |
40. Last I heard was that it was going to the California Supreme Court. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 02:33 PM Response to Original message |
44. I hope/pray that Prop 8 is overturned, but the OP's arugment probably isn't the route to that result |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fed_up_mother (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:28 PM Response to Reply #44 |
71. If we want to make it like other contracts, marriage would be a hell of a lot harder to get out of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RJ Connors (679 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:17 PM Response to Original message |
65. First off, let me thank you for stating the argument in the correct terms. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Fridays Child (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 11:38 PM Response to Reply #65 |
73. I hadn't thought of it in those terms. Very interesting points. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RJ Connors (679 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Nov-12-08 12:57 AM Response to Reply #73 |
74. Thank you for your kind comments |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
bobbert (548 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Nov-11-08 03:21 PM Response to Original message |
69. I'm a man and was in a 'domestic partnership' with my current wife before we were married |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sun May 05th 2024, 09:59 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC