no your post is a deflection from the OP because you did exactly what didnt matter.
1.) how does one compromise on equal rights? it is factually impossible to do so, also i dont dismiss anybody thouse people that think religion has anythign to do with this are simply factually 100% wrong. Legal marriage has nothing to do with religious marriage.
same case for womens rights, minority rights and interracial marriage. there was no compromise then either because its impossible.
2.) of course there is when there is something that is actually debatable and when there can actually be a compromise, some how you seem to think my opinion or your opinion matters here, they dont. theres no compromise you just want gays not to get legally married.
3.) feelings are meaningless to equal rights unless of course you think we should listen to the feeling of people who think minorities and women should not have equal rights and be lessers
4.) and there you have it thanks for making yet another failed post and exposing your biased dhishonest hand, he isnt a king and he cartainly isnt my king. You lose to facts again.
let me know when you are ready to answer the question.
I agree. But unfortunately my home state will probably be one of the last hold outs. But one never knows.
No, I answered the poll and addressed the topic. Move on.
No it doesn't.
Take the case of Elane Photography (the famous photography case from New Mexico). New Mexico doesn't have Same-sex Civil Marriage, therefore there was no "marriage" title right? Nope, people can still get married and not have a state license. The photographer was in violation of the state Public Accommodation law which prohibits discrimination by private businesses for various reasons: race, ethnicity, country of origin, age, disability, sex, and sexual orientation.
So even though the state wasn't in the "marriage" business for same-sex couples, the photographer was still breaking the laws of that state.
The problem (IMHO) ISN'T Civil Marriage laws, the problem is Pubic Accommodation laws where the government mandates business models instead of allowing the market to make the decision.
>>>>
if you get rid or the legal recognition of the title of marriage all together from same sex and straight then there is no equal treatment under the law because marriage is not recognized as an equal right under the law only a civil union is
no rights are being taken away or denied just the process and the title is changed to gain those rights from both parties
Ok for some fantasy reason there's going to be a national vote on equal rights for gays.
Save me all the failed arguments that its not equal rights or it should be left to the states or the government should be out of it all together blah blah blah nonsense, thats in other threads. This is simply about how YOU would vote if this happened.
and yes for the conspiracy theorist out there we will waste time and double down on the first amendment and say of course churches cant be forced to do these legal marriages, even though it has nothing to do with them anyway and this already cant happen.
so there it is, its voting time, what do you do.
Yes - you think gays should have equal rights and the right to legal marriage
No - you dont think they should have equal rights and you want them banned from getting legal marriage.
No vote - you stay home and dont vote at all
"i" dont get to do that
laws, rights, the constitution, case precedence etc do that
but for now instead of deflecting simply go on the set field of marriage.
and you factually ignored what the op saidyou are right nothing to debate this is factually what happened
The poll isn't complete.
You forgot the option
Nothing because I don't give a ****.
Edit: Sorry I would vote the thrid option. I just re-read the poll. It is there.
1.)But yet, that is exactly what you are trying to do. Over 200 years of law and precedence is against you.
2.)I'm not deflecting. The question in the title was a vote for equal rights for homosexuals, didn't say a thing about marriage. If the rights are equal, then they would be equal whether someone was married or single. So marriage is immaterial to true equal rights.
Move on.org
well that may be true since currently they are even on the list (that i know of)
13 states and DC have equal rights:
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Iowa
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
New Hampshire
New York
Rhode Island
Vermont
Washington
19 more are in various stages of fighting or establishing a fight for equal rights
New Mexico – is granting equal rights for now and the SSC is going to decided on this month
Court Case(s) in the works to establish equal rights:
Arkansas
Kentucky
Michigan
New Jersey (Will take Effect Oct 21st unless stopped)
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Utah
Virginia
Court Case(s) and Legislation in the works, which ever wins first:
ArizonaHawaii
Illinois
Nevada
Ohio
Legislation in the works:
Colorado
Florida
Oregon
See, no Georgia.
I just do not like subsidizing it with SS.
youll get there sooner or later, what do you think the last state could will be if scotus doesn't rule first
Alabama or Mississippi if ever. Here in Georgia we had an enlighten governor that put my state ahead of the rest of the south although he didn't do too good as president.
Obviously you understood my point so I'll address this to you. I've seen it said a number of times that people opposed to gay marriage should simply not participate in one (which, btw, I think is a fair statement). How is it justifiable to then support actually legally forcing someone who doesn't want to, to participate?
probably good guesses
wasnt it mississippi that actually tried to go back to not allowing interracial marriage and like 60% of their GOP think its wrong. thats crazy
of course that isnt meant to condemn normal people that are from there and GOPers.
Florists are a business, not a religion. It's clearly unconstitutional for a church to be forced to perform gay weddings, but hey, there is almost a decade of data in some states. Can you point to a single church that has been forced? Personally i would take my money elsewhere, but it's not the same thing.
I understand. I hadn't heard that but I wouldn't doubt it either.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?