U.S. judge strikes down Utah's gay marriage ban

[Ratttking]

Andy Partridge

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Damn! You're right. Well, we could argue that hate speech on this level should be intolerable, but according to people over in the Duck Dynasty thread this kind of thing is freedom of religion. I am so disappointed in Phil. I don't care if he was baited, you don't lump gays with bestiality and murderers.

Why not? All count as sins according to the Bible, but all sins can be forgiven. You don't have to believe in it yourself, but you don't get to dictate what Christians may believe.

Just like Christians cannot dictate what other people do with their own orifices and/or legal matters. Sexuality should not affect your taxes, will and testament, medical emergencies, and the like.

Neither should marriage.

Nor should completely different discussions only brought up by irritating college libertarians derail threads from the point.

Sorry kid, but I'm long since out of college and that is not my political party.You too seem to be off-topic now that you mention it.

[Ratttking]

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Neither should marriage.

At this point, I feel like we should just be able to walk into a courtroom and say "I, ____, do so wish that ____ should be involved with and, if the need should arise, in control of my financial, legal, and medical information." With a general contract in play for anyone who doesn't have a lawyer. I'd do that in a heartbeat because something tells me my family wouldn't have my best interest at heart if I fell into a coma.

I can agree with that to an extent, although power of attorney is not something to be granted without serious consideration. More than one person may be granted said powers, sometimes different people are in charge of different things, as was the case with a friend's grandmother: one was for medical, one for legal, etc.

Looking it up, it does not seem very hard or expensive to do; you can print forms from online and it doesn't cost much to have them notarized, if that step is even necessary in one's state. Getting witnesses to sign is free, and last time I had something notarized it cost $5.

[Alexander J Luthor]

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Neither should marriage.

At this point, I feel like we should just be able to walk into a courtroom and say "I, ____, do so wish that ____ should be involved with and, if the need should arise, in control of my financial, legal, and medical information." With a general contract in play for anyone who doesn't have a lawyer. I'd do that in a heartbeat because something tells me my family wouldn't have my best interest at heart if I fell into a coma.

I can agree with that to an extent, although power of attorney is not something to be granted without serious consideration. More than one person may be granted said powers, sometimes different people are in charge of different things, as was the case with a friend's grandmother: one was for medical, one for legal, etc.

Looking it up, it does not seem very hard or expensive to do; you can print forms from online and it doesn't cost much to have them notarized, if that step is even necessary in one's state. Getting witnesses to sign is free, and last time I had something notarized it cost $5.

If it's that easy, why not just strip these rights from the term "marriage" and grant them to anyone who wants to commit to a long standing relationship? Then, all a married person will have to worry about is the joining of assets and a pre-nupt, which I also don't understand why so many non-married couples seem to ignore. My last girlfriend and I had a rule that whoever signed first on something kept it. And our paychecks would alternate between food, rent, and extra stuff.

[Ratttking]

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Neither should marriage.

At this point, I feel like we should just be able to walk into a courtroom and say "I, ____, do so wish that ____ should be involved with and, if the need should arise, in control of my financial, legal, and medical information." With a general contract in play for anyone who doesn't have a lawyer. I'd do that in a heartbeat because something tells me my family wouldn't have my best interest at heart if I fell into a coma.

I can agree with that to an extent, although power of attorney is not something to be granted without serious consideration. More than one person may be granted said powers, sometimes different people are in charge of different things, as was the case with a friend's grandmother: one was for medical, one for legal, etc.

Looking it up, it does not seem very hard or expensive to do; you can print forms from online and it doesn't cost much to have them notarized, if that step is even necessary in one's state. Getting witnesses to sign is free, and last time I had something notarized it cost $5.

If it's that easy, why not just strip these rights from the term "marriage" and grant them to anyone who wants to commit to a long standing relationship? Then, all a married person will have to worry about is the joining of assets and a pre-nupt, which I also don't understand why so many non-married couples seem to ignore. My last girlfriend and I had a rule that whoever signed first on something kept it. And our paychecks would alternate between food, rent, and extra stuff.

Good question. I'm pretty sleepy now, let me get back to you tomorrow when I can think of a decent reply.

[Alexander J Luthor]

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Neither should marriage.

At this point, I feel like we should just be able to walk into a courtroom and say "I, ____, do so wish that ____ should be involved with and, if the need should arise, in control of my financial, legal, and medical information." With a general contract in play for anyone who doesn't have a lawyer. I'd do that in a heartbeat because something tells me my family wouldn't have my best interest at heart if I fell into a coma.

I can agree with that to an extent, although power of attorney is not something to be granted without serious consideration. More than one person may be granted said powers, sometimes different people are in charge of different things, as was the case with a friend's grandmother: one was for medical, one for legal, etc.

Looking it up, it does not seem very hard or expensive to do; you can print forms from online and it doesn't cost much to have them notarized, if that step is even necessary in one's state. Getting witnesses to sign is free, and last time I had something notarized it cost $5.

If it's that easy, why not just strip these rights from the term "marriage" and grant them to anyone who wants to commit to a long standing relationship? Then, all a married person will have to worry about is the joining of assets and a pre-nupt, which I also don't understand why so many non-married couples seem to ignore. My last girlfriend and I had a rule that whoever signed first on something kept it. And our paychecks would alternate between food, rent, and extra stuff.

Good question. I'm pretty sleepy now, let me get back to you tomorrow when I can think of a decent reply.

Ditto. No caffeine left in my system. It's so cold... Someone turned off the heater. crying

[SparkyKid3000]

Misty Moonsilver

We are really just going in circles here. I don't think your arguments are strong either. You're telling me that every single state--regardless of their beliefs HAVE to allow gays to marry.

Yes. It's this funny thing called equality which clearly you don't support.

Misty Moonsilver

Since you like to compare blacks to gays, then think about this--the slaves didn't like slavery. So a lot of them moved to places where slavery was illegal. Simple.

...Are you kidding me? You think the slaves just packed up and went on their merry way? Did you forget that they were in many cases found and dragged back right to the plantations? Even people who were free were kidnapped and taken to plantations and forced into slavery. Not so simple now is it?

Misty Moonsilver

But its unfair to force a religious state with a majority against gay marriage to allow it. The best way to make sure everyone is happy is to allow states to choose.

Unfair? Why does a stranger's marriage even matter to you? Let's look at this closely:
1. You don't have to like gay marriage.
2. You don't have to attend the wedding.
3. You don't have to pay for the wedding.
4. You don't have to marry a person of the same sex.
5. You don't have to watch it on TV.

We are a country with a Christian majority, but we are not a Christian nation. Learn the difference. I'll say it again; we are NOT a theocracy. Religion does not dominate our laws. You're in the wrong country if you think it should. What in your mind gives Christians the authority to take away the rights of gay people?

[Misty Moonsilver]

SparkyKid3000

Misty Moonsilver

We are really just going in circles here. I don't think your arguments are strong either. You're telling me that every single state--regardless of their beliefs HAVE to allow gays to marry.

Yes. It's this funny thing called equality which clearly you don't support.

Misty Moonsilver

Since you like to compare blacks to gays, then think about this--the slaves didn't like slavery. So a lot of them moved to places where slavery was illegal. Simple.

...Are you kidding me? You think the slaves just packed up and went on their merry way? Did you forget that they were in many cases found and dragged back right to the plantations? Even people who were free were kidnapped and taken to plantations and forced into slavery. Not so simple now is it?

Misty Moonsilver

But its unfair to force a religious state with a majority against gay marriage to allow it. The best way to make sure everyone is happy is to allow states to choose.

Unfair? Why does a stranger's marriage even matter to you? Let's look at this closely:
1. You don't have to like gay marriage.
2. You don't have to attend the wedding.
3. You don't have to pay for the wedding.
4. You don't have to marry a person of the same sex.
5. You don't have to watch it on TV.

We are a country with a Christian majority, but we are not a Christian nation. Learn the difference. I'll say it again; we are NOT a theocracy. Religion does not dominate our laws. You're in the wrong country if you think it should. What in your mind gives Christians the authority to take away the rights of gay people?

No one is taking away anyone's rights. Gays have never been allowed to marry.
And gay marriage matters to some folks because it:
A. Redefines marriage which leaves marriage opened to things like ***** and marriages with more than 2 people.
B. Goes against what they might what their children to see.
This sums it up quickly
And if gay marriage is legalized everywhere of course it affects everyone.
Its already being shoved down people's throats. It IS om tv. You can't watch anything without someone being gay or talking about being gay. What if I want to raise my children a certain way? Gay marriage is a slippery slope.
So when I say gays should go to a different state to get married, I would say the same to religious families that don't believe in gay marriage. They should move to a state without it.
I think in a way that everyone can be happy. Not in a way that shoves things down one's throat, which you seem to be in favor of.

[Ratttking]

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Neither should marriage.

At this point, I feel like we should just be able to walk into a courtroom and say "I, ____, do so wish that ____ should be involved with and, if the need should arise, in control of my financial, legal, and medical information." With a general contract in play for anyone who doesn't have a lawyer. I'd do that in a heartbeat because something tells me my family wouldn't have my best interest at heart if I fell into a coma.

I can agree with that to an extent, although power of attorney is not something to be granted without serious consideration. More than one person may be granted said powers, sometimes different people are in charge of different things, as was the case with a friend's grandmother: one was for medical, one for legal, etc.

Looking it up, it does not seem very hard or expensive to do; you can print forms from online and it doesn't cost much to have them notarized, if that step is even necessary in one's state. Getting witnesses to sign is free, and last time I had something notarized it cost $5.

If it's that easy, why not just strip these rights from the term "marriage" and grant them to anyone who wants to commit to a long standing relationship? Then, all a married person will have to worry about is the joining of assets and a pre-nupt, which I also don't understand why so many non-married couples seem to ignore. My last girlfriend and I had a rule that whoever signed first on something kept it. And our paychecks would alternate between food, rent, and extra stuff.

Good question. I'm pretty sleepy now, let me get back to you tomorrow when I can think of a decent reply.

Ditto. No caffeine left in my system. It's so cold... Someone turned off the heater. crying

Now that should be a crime in your state.

Well, since anyone may grant those rights to anyone else who is willing to take on the responsibility, I don't see why they should even need to be in a long term romantic relationship. Being in love with someone does not mean that the other person is automatically competent to make decisions on one's behalf, nor does being married. (Remember, the two things do not always go together.)

[GunsmithKitten]

Weelp, Misty just gave me something new to submit to FSTDT....

[Alexander J Luthor]

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

I can agree with that to an extent, although power of attorney is not something to be granted without serious consideration. More than one person may be granted said powers, sometimes different people are in charge of different things, as was the case with a friend's grandmother: one was for medical, one for legal, etc.

Looking it up, it does not seem very hard or expensive to do; you can print forms from online and it doesn't cost much to have them notarized, if that step is even necessary in one's state. Getting witnesses to sign is free, and last time I had something notarized it cost $5.

If it's that easy, why not just strip these rights from the term "marriage" and grant them to anyone who wants to commit to a long standing relationship? Then, all a married person will have to worry about is the joining of assets and a pre-nupt, which I also don't understand why so many non-married couples seem to ignore. My last girlfriend and I had a rule that whoever signed first on something kept it. And our paychecks would alternate between food, rent, and extra stuff.

Good question. I'm pretty sleepy now, let me get back to you tomorrow when I can think of a decent reply.

Ditto. No caffeine left in my system. It's so cold... Someone turned off the heater. crying

Now that should be a crime in your state.

Well, since anyone may grant those rights to anyone else who is willing to take on the responsibility, I don't see why they should even need to be in a long term romantic relationship. Being in love with someone does not mean that the other person is automatically competent to make decisions on one's behalf, nor does being married. (Remember, the two things do not always go together.)

Technically it is in apartment complexes. If your neighbor's pipes freeze because you let it get too cold you have to pay for the burst pipes, water damage, etc. and you may be evicted.

This is a house, though, and apparently SOME PEOPLE DON'T GET COLD. (I type as my screen is wide open for viewing)

Definitely true.

[Ratttking]

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

Alexander J Luthor

Ratttking

I can agree with that to an extent, although power of attorney is not something to be granted without serious consideration. More than one person may be granted said powers, sometimes different people are in charge of different things, as was the case with a friend's grandmother: one was for medical, one for legal, etc.

Looking it up, it does not seem very hard or expensive to do; you can print forms from online and it doesn't cost much to have them notarized, if that step is even necessary in one's state. Getting witnesses to sign is free, and last time I had something notarized it cost $5.

If it's that easy, why not just strip these rights from the term "marriage" and grant them to anyone who wants to commit to a long standing relationship? Then, all a married person will have to worry about is the joining of assets and a pre-nupt, which I also don't understand why so many non-married couples seem to ignore. My last girlfriend and I had a rule that whoever signed first on something kept it. And our paychecks would alternate between food, rent, and extra stuff.

Good question. I'm pretty sleepy now, let me get back to you tomorrow when I can think of a decent reply.

Ditto. No caffeine left in my system. It's so cold... Someone turned off the heater. crying

Now that should be a crime in your state.

Well, since anyone may grant those rights to anyone else who is willing to take on the responsibility, I don't see why they should even need to be in a long term romantic relationship. Being in love with someone does not mean that the other person is automatically competent to make decisions on one's behalf, nor does being married. (Remember, the two things do not always go together.)

Technically it is in apartment complexes. If your neighbor's pipes freeze because you let it get too cold you have to pay for the burst pipes, water damage, etc. and you may be evicted.

This is a house, though, and apparently SOME PEOPLE DON'T GET COLD. (I type as my screen is wide open for viewing)

Definitely true.

*sends warm thoughts*

...

Damn dude, it's -8 in both cities I looked up in ND. You should put her tampons in the freezer. twisted

[USS_Galactica]

Misty Moonsilver

No one is taking away anyone's rights. Gays have never been allowed to marry.
And gay marriage matters to some folks because it:
A. Redefines marriage which leaves marriage opened to things like ***** and marriages with more than 2 people.
B. Goes against what they might what their children to see.
This sums it up quickly
And if gay marriage is legalized everywhere of course it affects everyone.
Its already being shoved down people's throats. It IS om tv. You can't watch anything without someone being gay or talking about being gay. What if I want to raise my children a certain way? Gay marriage is a slippery slope.
So when I say gays should go to a different state to get married, I would say the same to religious families that don't believe in gay marriage. They should move to a state without it.
I think in a way that everyone can be happy. Not in a way that shoves things down one's throat, which you seem to be in favor of.

Marriage has been redefined plenty of times. It used to be cool to marry children to adults, but it won't be now just because gay marriage is a thing. Also other countries/cultures have very different ideas of marriage and sexuality.

[Alexander J Luthor]

Ratttking

*sends warm thoughts*

...

Damn dude, it's -8 in both cities I looked up in ND. You should put her tampons in the freezer. twisted

I would, if dudes wore tampons. XD It got to -32 last night. That map you looked at lied because it's not including windshield, which drops the overall temp to about -12 today. Thursday or Friday it was -20 at 2pm.

[Lulamoon Sage]

Misty Moonsilver

No one is taking away anyone's rights. Gays have never been allowed to marry.
And gay marriage matters to some folks because it:
A. Redefines marriage which leaves marriage opened to things like ***** and marriages with more than 2 people.

Wow. Just...wow. I wasn't going to get back into this cause I've said my piece, but the sheer fallciousness of that statement there drew me right back in. First, I wanna start by saying that I don't think you're wrong for being against gay marriage. I couldn't care less unless you were actively going out of your way to dehumanize those people.

I just wanted to say that while I agree with your point that gay marriage will indeed redefine marriage in general, I cannot, I repeat, CANNOT agree with the second part of that first point.

How in the world does two consenting adults getting married suddenly make it okay for an adult to have sex with a child? Where's it written that "Once same-sex couples are allowed to get married in Utah, Johnny no-name has a free pass to go ahead and take screw the pooch literally"? And what about this change (that's admittedly so monumental here) is going to change the opinions of about 80% of the world on the matter of taking more than one husband or wife? Can you answer these questions for me?