Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM[W:95]

[AGENT J]

Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM - ABC News

[h=1]NM Judge Upholds County's Gay Marriage Ruling[/h]LOS ALAMOS, N.M. September 4, 2013 (AP)
By BARRY MASSEY Associated Press

A northern New Mexico county became the eighth in the state on Wednesday to clear the way for same-sex couples to be married.The Los Alamos County clerk's office issued a marriage license to a lesbian couple shortly after a state district judge upheld a decision requiring that to happen.Janet Newton and Maria Thibodeau were denied a license last week and filed a lawsuit that led to a ruling by District Court Judge Sheri Raphaelson that same-sex couples are entitled to be married in New Mexico.Los Alamos County Clerk Sharon Stover went to court Wednesday to defend her decision to deny the couple a license, but the judge ruled against the clerk.
-----------------------------------------------------
In hopes of getting a uniform statewide ruling on gay marriage from the Supreme Court, an association representing county clerks statewide — Democrats and Republicans — plans to appeal an Albuquerque judge's ruling last week that said it was unconstitutional to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Back-up Links:
NM Supreme Court Set to Hear Marriage Equality Case :: EDGE Boston
NM Judge Upholds County's Gay Marriage Ruling - ABC News (Older but still part of the story)

now it looks like 2 more states will be granting equal rights soon, thats 15 and that would bring the total to 3 or 5 this year depending on how you look at it> Some ruled on it before this year but it went into effect this year.

The dominoes are falling! that's like the 3rd or 4th gays rights victory or possible victory Ive been able to post in just as many days.

I wonder what states will be next?!
:2usflag:

 

[Midwest Lib]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM - ABC News

Back-up Links:
NM Supreme Court Set to Hear Marriage Equality Case :: EDGE Boston
NM Judge Upholds County's Gay Marriage Ruling - ABC News (Older but still part of the story)

now it looks like 2 more states will be granting equal rights soon, thats 15 and that would bring the total to 3 or 5 this year depending on how you look at it> Some ruled on it before this year but it went into effect this year.

The dominoes are falling! that's like the 3rd or 4th gays rights victory or possible victory Ive been able to post in just as many days.

I wonder what states will be next?!
:2usflag:

Hopefully all of them in a short period of time! The writing is on the wall and change is coming. It's time for the remaining people opposing this to get on the right side of history.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Personally I don't care much about the gay marriage issue one way or the other but it does raise a question. If gays can marry who or what is next, should we start with making polygamy legal? If anyone can marry anyone why can't anyone marry multiple people? Why not one man and two women or even two women and a man or..... use your imagination. Once you start messing around with "marriage" where does it end?

 

[clownboy]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Hopefully all of them in a short period of time! The writing is on the wall and change is coming. It's time for the remaining people opposing this to get on the right side of history.

You can stop crying in yer soup, the rest of us have given up and pretty much said goodbye to the America we knew and loved. Screw it, just give us the "free" stuff, the experiment that was the United STATES is done.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Hopefully all of them in a short period of time! The writing is on the wall and change is coming. It's time for the remaining people opposing this to get on the right side of history.

pretty much or in 25 years they are going to look like this

you know how most people laugh and make fun of these baboons below and how dumb and bigoted they were and most of uc cant imagine there were people this imbecilic.



well in 25 years it will be no different but the picture will look like this



now of course if people want to BELIEVE, THINK, and PREACH minorities, women and gays are bad and evil they are free to do so and i would protect thier right to do so. But discriminating against them and trying to deny them equal rights is just dumb.

Slowly but surely the US fixes its social wrongs.

 

[Verax]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

You can stop crying in yer soup, the rest of us have given up and pretty much said goodbye to the America we knew and loved. Screw it, just give us the "free" stuff, the experiment that was the United STATES is done.

Terble, just terble! :lamo :2bigcry:

 

[Verax]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

pretty much or in 25 years they are going to look like this

you know how most people laugh and make fun of these baboons below and how dumb and bigoted they were and most of uc cant imagine there were people this imbecilic.

well in 25 years it will be no different but the picture will look like this

now of course if people want to BELIEVE, THINK, and PREACH minorities, women and gays are bad and evil they are free to do so and i would protect thier right to do so. But discriminating against them and trying to deny them equal rights is just dumb.

Slowly but surely the US fixes its social wrongs.

Twenty-five years from now conservatives will be talking about how they are the true defenders of the LGBT community and Libruls are their oppressors.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Personally I don't care much about the gay marriage issue one way or the other but it does raise a question. If gays can marry who or what is next, should we start with making polygamy legal? If anyone can marry anyone why can't anyone marry multiple people? Why not one man and two women or even two women and a man or..... use your imagination. Once you start messing around with "marriage" where does it end?

Gay marriage doesnt lead to polygamy anymore than hetero marriage does and theres no precedence set by gay or hetero marriage alone that lends itself to fight for polygamy.
This slippery slop fallacy is always a complete failure.

we heard it with minorities and women voting, "if they get to vote I might as well let my horse vote" and with interracial marriage, "if a white can marry a black why not just marry a dog"

these irrational failed straw men and slipper slope fear tactics were illogical and inane back then and that holds true today fore gay marriage.

so to answer your question where does THIS particular issue end (where does equal rights for gays lead)?, it ends at equal rights for gays because that argument doesnt hold true for any other groups.

to make your question honest and or logical, you would have to ask where does marriage lead us PERIOD.

and ill try to answer that question also. Marriage is consenting, sound mind adults. SO if polygamist want to fight for the NEW right to marry they "could" and if they would win, which i would support, it will have nothing to do with solely GAY marriage but them wanting to have marriage laws recognize multiple partners which it doesnt do currently.

the hard part would be figuring out the rules, property rights, taxes, what happens when one member of the marriage dies or divorces etc. Among fighting for a new right that is their other hurdle.

after that theres nothing left that fits legal contract law and consenting sound mind adults. Do you have any specific ones youd like to discuss?

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Twenty-five years from now conservatives will be talking about how they are the true defenders of the LGBT community and Libruls are their oppressors.

while im sure many will thats not fair to group them all together, many conservatives support equal rights. Stereotypically their platform is against it but platforms and media all suck.
just sayin

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Gay marriage doesnt lead to polygamy anymore than hetero marriage does and theres no precedence set by gay or hetero marriage alone that lends itself to fight for polygamy.
This slippery slop fallacy is always a complete failure.

we heard it with minorities and women voting, "if they get to vote I might as well let my horse vote" and with interracial marriage, "if a white can marry a black why not just marry a dog"

these irrational failed straw men and slipper slope fear tactics were illogical and inane back then and that holds true today fore gay marriage.

so to answer your question where does THIS particular issue end (where does equal rights for gays lead)?, it ends at equal rights for gays because that argument doesnt hold true for any other groups.

to make your question honest and or logical, you would have to ask where does marriage lead us PERIOD.

and ill try to answer that question also. Marriage is consenting, sound mind adults. SO if polygamist want to fight for the NEW right to marry they "could" and if they would win, which i would support, it will have nothing to do with solely GAY marriage but them wanting to have marriage laws recognize multiple partners which it doesnt do currently.

the hard part would be figuring out the rules, property rights, taxes, what happens when one member of the marriage dies or divorces etc. Among fighting for a new right that is their other hurdle.

after that theres nothing left that fits legal contract law and consenting sound mind adults. Do you have any specific ones youd like to discuss?

First you say no slippery slope then you make a comment that proves there is one.

 

[clownboy]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Terble, just terble! :lamo :2bigcry:

Yep, we know, you don't care. As long as you get what you want when you want it that's the gold standard. We'll see how you feel in a generation when the folks who did care have checked out, given up and joined the gimme set.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

First you say no slippery slope then you make a comment that proves there is one.

not if you can read there not, maybe read the post over

try focusing on the words new right, no precedence leads itself to polygamy

there is no slippery slope and the best part is if you could ever prove one which you cant it would be based on marriage period, not GAY marriage. but that point is moot since there isnt one.

but as always if you disagree by all means explain to me what the slippery slope of GAY marriage is and how it leads to other marriage using only its precedence.

hey maybe you are right and the many others are wrong?

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Terble, just terble! :lamo :2bigcry:

yep always funny watching people get upset and angry of equal rights, pure hypocrisy.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Gay marriage doesnt lead to polygamy anymore than hetero marriage does and theres no precedence set by gay or hetero marriage alone that lends itself to fight for polygamy.
This slippery slop fallacy is always a complete failure.

we heard it with minorities and women voting, "if they get to vote I might as well let my horse vote" and with interracial marriage, "if a white can marry a black why not just marry a dog"

these irrational failed straw men and slipper slope fear tactics were illogical and inane back then and that holds true today fore gay marriage.

so to answer your question where does THIS particular issue end (where does equal rights for gays lead)?, it ends at equal rights for gays because that argument doesnt hold true for any other groups.

to make your question honest and or logical, you would have to ask where does marriage lead us PERIOD.

and ill try to answer that question also. Marriage is consenting, sound mind adults. SO if polygamist want to fight for the NEW right to marry they "could" and if they would win, which i would support, it will have nothing to do with solely GAY marriage but them wanting to have marriage laws recognize multiple partners which it doesnt do currently.

the hard part would be figuring out the rules, property rights, taxes, what happens when one member of the marriage dies or divorces etc. Among fighting for a new right that is their other hurdle.

after that theres nothing left that fits legal contract law and consenting sound mind adults. Do you have any specific ones youd like to discuss?

That all depends on how SSM is implemented. As a standard popular change to state law, I agree with you, but if changed by judicial fiat on "equal rights" grounds being redefined as applying to a (any?) "strong personal desire" then polygamy, polyandry and polygyny may be just a matter of time as well.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

not if you can read there not, maybe read the post over

try focusing on the words new right, no precedence leads itself to polygamy

there is no slippery slope and the best part is if you could ever prove one which you cant it would be based on marriage period, not GAY marriage. but that point is moot since there isnt one.

but as always if you disagree by all means explain to me what the slippery slope of GAY marriage is and how it leads to other marriage using only its precedence.

hey maybe you are right and the many others are wrong?

A "new right" within the confines of the word "marriage" makes marriage a different word. Your saying that polygamist may be the next to demand to be married is the slippery slope argument.

 

[clownboy]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

yep always funny watching people get upset and angry of equal rights, pure hypocrisy.

Yeah, yeah, tell it to someone who buys your lame argument that this all has anything to do with equal rights under the Constitution. I know you like to repeat it incessantly, so have at it. Still not buying it.

Do what you want, the country I served, was proud to call my own, is history. You and folks who spout the same garbage can polish this turd. Just give me my free stuff.

 

[douglas]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

pretty much or in 25 years they are going to look like this

you know how most people laugh and make fun of these baboons below and how dumb and bigoted they were and most of uc cant imagine there were people this imbecilic.
View attachment 67153441


well in 25 years it will be no different but the picture will look like this
View attachment 67153440


now of course if people want to BELIEVE, THINK, and PREACH minorities, women and gays are bad and evil they are free to do so and i would protect thier right to do so. But discriminating against them and trying to deny them equal rights is just dumb.

Slowly but surely the US fixes its social wrongs.

After a careful forensic analysis of that image, I think I've found the source of American Conservatism!!

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

That all depends on how SSM is implemented. As a standard popular change to state law, I agree with you, but if changed by judicial fiat on "equal rights" grounds being redefined as applying to a (any?) "strong personal desire" then polygamy, polyandry and polygyny may be just a matter of time as well.

no equal rights wouldnt apply since NOBODY can have a marriage contract with multiple partners

so unless a state banned specifically polygamous MAARRIAGE first, then they could argue discrimination and equality but that would have NOTHING to do with gay marriage or hetero marriage.

also polygamy is polandry/polgynyy

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

1.)A "new right" within the confines of the word "marriage" makes marriage a different word.
2.) Your saying that polygamist may be the next to demand to be married is the slippery slope argument.

translation: you cant provide the argument for the slippery slope like i asked
1.)nope not at all, it would be a new right because NOBODY can enter into a marriage contract with more than two parties
2.) factually false, like i already ask if you disagree provide the facts that lead for gay marriage to polygamy marriage just based on gay marriage. Id love to read it. Maybe you dont know what slippery slope actually means?

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

translation: you cant provide the argument for the slippery slope like i asked
1.)nope not at all, it would be a new right because NOBODY can enter into a marriage contract with more than two parties
2.) factually false, like i already ask if you disagree provide the facts that lead for gay marriage to polygamy marriage just based on gay marriage. Id love to read it. Maybe you dont know what slippery slope actually means?

You are the one that said it could be a next step and by so doing agreed with me. I don't know what you want to argue about?

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

1.)Yeah, yeah, tell it to someone who buys your lame argument that this all has anything to do with equal rights under the Constitution. I know you like to repeat it incessantly, so have at it. Still not buying it.
2.) Do what you want
3.) the country I served, was proud to call my own, is history. You and folks who spout the same garbage can polish this turd. Just give me my free stuff.

1.) honest and educated people dont care what you buy because you buying it or not doesnt impact that facts
2.) no i cant do what i want theres laws i must follow and rights of others i must respect.
3.) to bad you feel that way, the awesome thing is you are free to leave and find a country with less freedom and rights that suits you.

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

You are the one that said it could be a next step and by so doing agreed with me. I don't know what you want to argue about?

see thats it you dont understand what a slippery slope is, thanks for clearing that fact up.

like i said if you disagree provide the facts that lead for gay marriage to polygamy marriage just based on gay marriage. Id love to read it. Maybe you dont know what slippery slope actually means?

 

[AGENT J]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

After a careful forensic analysis of that image, I think I've found the source of American Conservatism!!
View attachment 67153442

LOL funny but again i have to point out many conservatives are for equal rights for gays

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

see thats it you dont understand what a slippery slope is, thanks for clearing that fact up.

like i said if you disagree provide the facts that lead for gay marriage to polygamy marriage just based on gay marriage. Id love to read it. Maybe you dont know what slippery slope actually means?

The slippery slope is when you change the fundamental established meaning of the word marriage. Marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman and when you alter that to be a man and a man, a woman and a woman you have taken a huge step down that slippery slope. From that point everyone with a relationship other than the traditional one will demand to be allowed to marry. Slippery slope, camels nose under the tent, call it what you will but marriage will be under constant assault.

 

[tererun]

Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

Personally I don't care much about the gay marriage issue one way or the other but it does raise a question. If gays can marry who or what is next, should we start with making polygamy legal? If anyone can marry anyone why can't anyone marry multiple people? Why not one man and two women or even two women and a man or..... use your imagination. Once you start messing around with "marriage" where does it end?

From the point of legal status and the legal ramifications of that idea you do run into a more complicated contract which requires more rules and arbitration. The marriage contract focusses a lot on legal responsibilities, assets, and the status of the contract. You have singles, you have doubles, but when you get into a polygamous marriage you enter into a contract that would look more like a corporate contract. For instance if a couple decides to break up the partnership is done and they go back to single status. If you have three or more people it is likely some will chose to stay together and others will chose to leave the contract. How do you divide things up when the contract is over considering divorce is pretty standard? Who gets to make decisions on finances for someone if they are incapacitated? As a partnership one person gets that authority, but then you would have multiple people in charge who would potentially have a say in things like medical treatments, and different opinions which they may not have time to argue out. In this case you do actually have large complications which come about that are not religious in nature.

It is not that these issues cannot be addressed as we have legal contracts like corporations which are defined by a starting contract where the members decide things like responsibilities and asset management when they enter in, and often have methods for members leaving and other issues. It is not very romantic or religious to start declaring these things before a marriage which is a legal contract which is treated very simplistically by many people entering into it. People do not like looking at the divide between the religious and romantic areas of marriage and the legal contract which is what the state is truly responsible for. I think people would have to start taking a much less romanticized view of marriage in order to make polygamy work, and I don't think that is what people in love are really prepared to do today.

I do not have any real opposition to it on a emotional or religious standpoint. If you do not feel it is right on a moral standpoint you simply do not have to involve yourself in one. Still, it is hard enough for the government to handle all the BS of a divorce between two people and maybe they should stay out of polygamy and leave it to religion to make religious oaths between people and limit the personal contracts to partnerships.