Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Life


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-02-2004, 06:58 PM   #1 (permalink)
Banned
 
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Virginia just became a negative state

Link Link Link

Quote:
Virginia just passed the "Marriage Affirmation Act." Not only does it ban gay marriage or civil union, and ban recognizing gay marriages or civil unions performed in other states, but it bans any "partnership contract or other arrangements that purport to provide the benefits of marriage."

What benefits are those? Well, the bill's pretty clear about that. ETA: Reading through it again, it's not actually out on the table in plain English. But this particular language probably means the following, according to the lawyers looking at the bill:

Powers of attorney. Custody arrangements. Health insurance coverage for same-sex domestic partners. Joint ownership of property. And--most sickeningly--wills leaving property to a same-sex partner.

It means that starting July 1, when this bill goes into effect, anyone who dies with a will that leaves their property to their same-sex partner can be treated as if they died without a will. Their property goes to their blood relatives. Don't have any? Sorry, your property's forfeit to the state of Virginia.

ETA: Not that the last is necessarily likely--it would probably be legal under this law, but the state's lawyers may not be quite that ready to start a legal battle. Wills being invalidated in favor of blood relatives is very, very likely.

The last time we had laws about who you could leave property to in a will, those laws were to forbid people from leaving property to slaves. That's not a part of our history I'd particularly like to revisit.

Anyone living in Virginia with a child they've adopted in a second-parent adoption? Sorry, you're a legal stranger to your kid in Virginia. If your partner dies, your kid goes to your partner's relatives or becomes a ward of the state. Have a custody order from another state? Thrown out. Have an order to pay child support to your ex's biological child? Probably thrown out too.

Anyone have a power of attorney for your elderly or disabled partner? Sorry, those decisions have to be made by a "real" relative. Or a court-appointed guardian, if you don't have one. Get in a wreck on the Virginia side of the state line, with a health-care power of attorney from another state authorizing your partner to make medical decisions for you? It's probably a worthless piece of paper, and, personally, that scares me to death. We live in Maryland. All our relatives live south of here. It's not like we can avoid driving through Virginia. We could fly, but the airport's in Virginia.

ETA: Whether to honor wills, custody orders, or powers of attorney is going to be up to individual judges. Some of them, in more liberal areas, are likely to say that these don't constitute "benefits of marriage." Many of them, in the majority of Virginia, are likely to say that they do, and throw them out. It's a big, scary question mark. And it leaves people who've made these legal documents to protect their families with no better answer to "Are they still valid?" than "There's a chance that they will be, if you get a good judge."

artaxastra's been getting calls all week from people who are going to have to leave the state. There's the couple who just moved into their new house in Virginia two months ago, the house that come July can't legally be in both their names. There's the national credit card company that may have to move its headquarters if it wants to continue to issue joint credit cards to same-sex couples. There's the professor leaving his tenured position at a university because if he stays his partner won't get his pension.

And there's the one that made her nearly cry at the dinner table telling me about it, the old lady in southern Virginia who lives with her partner. She's sixty-five, disabled, and blind. If her partner can't have her power of attorney anymore, she doesn't know how she'll get her bills paid or her banking done or her prescriptions filled at the drugstore. She asked artaxastra what to do, and the best she could say was, "Move across the state line into North Carolina."

This is just. Plain. Wrong.

And why are they doing this? Well, one legislator was kind enough to provide an explanation: to drive homosexuals in the state of Virginia into a legal limbo, so that they'll either have to become heterosexual or leave, and to break the power of homosexuals in state business and politics.
denim is offline  
Old 05-02-2004, 07:33 PM   #2 (permalink)
MSD
The sky calls to us ...
 
MSD's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: CT
"become heterosexual or leave"

I can't believe that people still believe this kind of crap. If everyone could choose their sexual orientation, not many would choose the hard way.
MSD is offline  
Old 05-02-2004, 07:51 PM   #3 (permalink)
H12
I'm not about getting creamed, I'm about winning!
 
H12's Avatar
 
Location: K-Town, TN
Now, I'm indifferent to homosexuality; I don't really care one way or another if someone decides to live that way, because it most likely won't affect me. With that said, I am border-line offended by those actions, especially the part about wills devoted to a same-sex partner being void. That's flat-out ridiculous.
__________________
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act, but a habit."
--Aristotle
H12 is offline  
Old 05-02-2004, 08:05 PM   #4 (permalink)
The Original JizzSmacka
 
Jesus Pimp's Avatar
 
This is why I don't live in the south.
__________________
Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.
Jesus Pimp is offline  
Old 05-02-2004, 08:28 PM   #5 (permalink)
Comment or else!!
 
KellyC's Avatar
 
Location: Home sweet home
let just cross our fingers and hope that its the only state to do this.

Might as well post a big sign that says "homosexuals are not welcome in this state!"

*shakes head*
__________________
Him: Ok, I have to ask, what do you believe?
Me: Shit happens.
KellyC is offline  
Old 05-02-2004, 09:06 PM   #6 (permalink)
Like John Goodman, but not.
 
Journeyman's Avatar
 
Location: SFBA, California
Any lawyers care to chime in on anything that's going to stop someone from using the fourteenth amendment to make this law deemed unconstitutional by the supreme court?
Journeyman is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 06:25 AM   #7 (permalink)
beauty in the breakdown
 
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Quote:
Originally posted by Journeyman
Any lawyers care to chime in on anything that's going to stop someone from using the fourteenth amendment to make this law deemed unconstitutional by the supreme court?
To get to the supreme court, someone has to file a lawsuit that has to get pushed all the way up there. That would take five years, at the least. Dont count on that anytime soon.
__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato
sailor is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 06:56 AM   #8 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Jesus Pimp
This is why I don't live in the south.
Yeah. There's NO homophobia in the north. In fact, northerners are perfect in every way. No racial problems, no crime at all, they all have all their teeth. Good thing all the backwards fucks live in the south.


Christ sometimes the ignorance of people is astounding.
shakran is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 07:20 AM   #9 (permalink)
Banned
 
Wow, I cannot believe how far Virginia has gone with this. Especially with enough votes to override any potential veto. this is crazy.
pocon1 is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 07:32 AM   #10 (permalink)
Right Now
 
Location: Home
denim: Great article, but I'd like to see your opinions posted along with the quote. The title you gave suggests your stance, but please in the future amplify with at least a couple of lines what you think about the article you post.
Peetster is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 08:04 AM   #11 (permalink)
The Original JizzSmacka
 
Jesus Pimp's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by shakran
Yeah. There's NO homophobia in the north. In fact, northerners are perfect in every way. No racial problems, no crime at all, they all have all their teeth. Good thing all the backwards fucks live in the south.


Christ sometimes the ignorance of people is astounding.
Did I say there was none? No. In the north we don't have entire states trying to ban homosexuality. Your assumptions of my ignorance are astounding!
__________________
Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

Last edited by Jesus Pimp; 05-03-2004 at 08:08 AM..
Jesus Pimp is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 08:05 AM   #12 (permalink)
Psycho
 
iccky's Avatar
 
Location: Princeton, NJ
Quote:
Originally posted by shakran
Yeah. There's NO homophobia in the north. In fact, northerners are perfect in every way. No racial problems, no crime at all, they all have all their teeth. Good thing all the backwards fucks live in the south.


Christ sometimes the ignorance of people is astounding.
Point taken, but whatever the attitudes of some of our fellow northerners we don't pass laws like this in the north.
iccky is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 08:19 AM   #13 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
first I don't live in the south because of the restrictive bible bangers, and the rednecks. Being Asian and having ALWAYS dated white girls, I got odd looks and snide remarks all the time.

as far as "rescinding" all benefits like power of attorney, et. al. that's what is truly ignorant. To try to supercede documents without proper legal precedent is just silly.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 09:28 AM   #14 (permalink)
I'm not a blonde! I'm knot! I'm knot! I'm knot!
 
raeanna74's Avatar
 
Location: Upper Michigan
To each his own I believe. To make laws like this to control what people do in their personal lives is wrong. I mean I'm married to a partner of the opposite sex but what if I wanted to leave my money to someone who had helped us out a lot while hubby went through a lot of trouble. If it was a girl and not a blood relation and we lived in virgina then she would be excluded on the basis of this law as I understand it. I should be able to choose where my estate goes and why. It's not the State's business WHY I'm giving my money to a person of the same sex. Next thing they're going to outlaw same sex sexual relations again. I thought we were past that outdated notion. While we're at it why don't be outlaw drinking. Those lawmakers would probably be in trouble then. I know I'm rambling. Sorry - this is just so stupid that they would think themselves so high and mighty as to control people like this. Grrrr
__________________
"Always learn the rules so that you can break them properly." Dalai Lama
My Karma just ran over your Dogma.
raeanna74 is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 09:39 AM   #15 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: Oh God, the rain!
This isn't freedom.
Asuka{eve} is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 09:50 AM   #16 (permalink)
Insane
 
Cynthetiq

I call shenanigans. I've lived in the south all my live (Texas, Houston even), have dated an all asian girl and a half asian girl, and never got a single snide comment or look. While I don't doubt that what you said happened to you, I'm sure you wouldn't want to paint an entire region and people with one brush. I mean, that might look bigoted or ignorant.
Shades is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 09:55 AM   #17 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Jesus Pimp
Did I say there was none? No. In the north we don't have entire states trying to ban homosexuality. Your assumptions of my ignorance are astounding!

Well I just found it ironic that the best way you could come up with to express your anger at one group being intolerant of another was to state your intolerance for a group.


BTW, Minnesota is about to vote on a gay marriage ban, and 58% of Minnesotans are in favor of the ban. Last time I checked, they were north of the mason/dixon line.

The Wisconsin state assembly approved a gay marriage ban by a vote of 68 to 27. They're northerners too.

I'm just tired of all the bullshit about the south. Northerners (and I know, because I live among them) love to act like the south is the rectum of the country, when in fact there's every bit as much racism, prejudice, and bigotry in the north as there is in the south. The only difference is that the southerners don't deny it.
shakran is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 12:04 PM   #18 (permalink)
Insane
 
And the show has reached... a new low.

Why is it we bothered with the civil war again? We should have let the fuckers leave and just snuck all the slaves out when they were too busy having another bigot rally in Billy Jo Bob's yard.
meepa is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 12:15 PM   #19 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
Quote:
Originally posted by Shades
Cynthetiq

I call shenanigans. I've lived in the south all my live (Texas, Houston even), have dated an all asian girl and a half asian girl, and never got a single snide comment or look. While I don't doubt that what you said happened to you, I'm sure you wouldn't want to paint an entire region and people with one brush. I mean, that might look bigoted or ignorant.
It happened since 1986 until 1992, then i stopped dating. Now my wife is white, and when we are in China town...she gets lots of looks when we walk hand in hand.

so the reverse is true.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 12:15 PM   #20 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Might I remind you that the slaves got here through the port of Boston. The north may not have kept the slaves, but they certainly profited off of them.

At any rate, anyone who claims that prejudice is bad looks like a total jackass by exhibiting prejudice in the same sentence.
shakran is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 01:44 PM   #21 (permalink)
Addict
 
Location: watching from the treeline
Am I the only one who views this law as a good thing?
__________________
Trinity: "What do you need?"

Neo: "Guns. Lots of guns."

-The Matrix
timalkin is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 02:01 PM   #22 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
Quote:
Originally posted by timalkin
Am I the only one who views this law as a good thing?
i think so. how do you see it a good thing for them to not just ban gay marriage but REVOKE all the items that work for same sex lovers but not same sex friends?
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 06:26 PM   #23 (permalink)
beauty in the breakdown
 
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Quote:
Originally posted by timalkin
Am I the only one who views this law as a good thing?
Yeah, I think so. Wanting to ban gay marriage is one thing, wanting to take away other rights that could very well not even have anything to do with homosexuality is another.
__________________
"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws."
--Plato
sailor is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 07:55 PM   #24 (permalink)
The Original JizzSmacka
 
Jesus Pimp's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by shakran


At any rate, anyone who claims that prejudice is bad looks like a total jackass by exhibiting prejudice in the same sentence.
Oxymoron.

Quote:
BTW, Minnesota is about to vote on a gay marriage ban, and 58% of Minnesotans are in favor of the ban. Last time I checked, they were north of the mason/dixon line.
Actually it's considered the midwest bud.
__________________
Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

Last edited by Jesus Pimp; 05-03-2004 at 08:21 PM..
Jesus Pimp is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 08:50 PM   #25 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Jesus Pimp

Actually it's considered the midwest bud.

And Virginia is considered the East Coast. What's your point?

Minnesota/wisconsin sure aren't in the south, and they are certainly north of the mason dixon line as I said in the first place..
shakran is offline  
Old 05-03-2004, 11:13 PM   #26 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
It happened since 1986 until 1992, then i stopped dating. Now my wife is white, and when we are in China town...she gets lots of looks when we walk hand in hand.

so the reverse is true.
Then I'm even more confused- was your point that there's just something about the south that turns everyone into a racist, regardless of their own skin color? Something in the water, perhaps? Or what?
Shades is offline  
Old 05-04-2004, 04:06 AM   #27 (permalink)
Loves my girl in thongs
 
arch13's Avatar
 
Location: North of Mexico, South of Canada
Quote:
Originally posted by Jesus Pimp
This is why I don't live in the south.
Yeah, see. Here's the thing. no southern resident would call VA the south. North Carolina or at most Richmond is south. But the majority of the state is more ideologicly the north. And migh i remined you it's righ next to the capital?

Now what does that say.

I for one have a less pleasant opinion of Northerners than southerners.

On the topic: Let's all write letters to the ACLU in support of a legal challange to this. At the very least something of this nature needs to be put to popular vote. And that's me refraining my opinion.
__________________
Seen on an employer evaluation:

"The wheel is turning but the hamsters dead"
____________________________
Is arch13 really a porn diety ? find out after the film at 11.
-Nanofever
arch13 is offline  
Old 05-04-2004, 05:39 AM   #28 (permalink)
The Original JizzSmacka
 
Jesus Pimp's Avatar
 
Quote:
Yeah, see. Here's the thing. no southern resident would call VA the south. North Carolina or at most Richmond is south. But the majority of the state is more ideologicly the north. And migh i remined you it's righ next to the capital?

Now what does that say.

I for one have a less pleasant opinion of Northerners than southerners.
So we're arguing geography now?
__________________
Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

Last edited by Jesus Pimp; 05-04-2004 at 05:46 AM..
Jesus Pimp is offline  
Old 05-04-2004, 05:46 AM   #29 (permalink)
Psycho
 
iccky's Avatar
 
Location: Princeton, NJ
Let me just clarify my view of the south and maybe we can put this to rest.

I do not think that all southerners are ignorant redneck hicks. I don't think that just becuase you are from the north you are less bigoted, a nicer person, whatever. You are correct that to make a sweeping judgement of southerners in a statement denoucing prejudice would be hypocritical.

The reason I don't want to live in the South is that, in my experience, the politics of southern states tend to be more dominated by what I consider to be closed minded socially intolerant forces then the politics in the north, midwest, california, pretty much anywhere besides Utah. I don't care to live under that kind of government.

This new laws is a fine example. Not only is the state of virginia banning gay marrige, and refusing to recognize gay marriges performed in other states (violating the full faith and credit clause, despite the defense of marrige act), they are stripping homosexuals of other legal rights (the right to leave your property to whomever you want) simply because they are gay. A lawmaker felt perfectly fine saying that he wanted homosexuals run out of his state, and suffered no negative repercussions. I don't want to live in a place where my government can do that, regardless of the qualities of the people who live there.

Quote:
Originally posted by timalkin
Am I the only one who views this law as a good thing?
Maybe you shouls explain why to make this thread something other then a debate about southerners.

Last edited by iccky; 05-04-2004 at 06:00 AM..
iccky is offline  
Old 05-04-2004, 06:07 AM   #30 (permalink)
Right Now
 
Location: Home
Quote:
Originally posted by meepa
We should have let the fuckers leave and just snuck all the slaves out when they were too busy having another bigot rally in Billy Jo Bob's yard.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jesus Pimp
Actually it's considered the midwest bud.
Strikes one and two. It's a pitcher's count now.
Peetster is offline  
Old 05-04-2004, 11:54 PM   #31 (permalink)
don't ignore this-->
 
bermuDa's Avatar
 
Location: CA
This isn't a matter of north and south, or east and west...

There are many states all over the US trying to ban gay marriage and the recognition of it. Let's keep the discussion to how or why we agree or disagree with the bill, not criticize the state it's being pushed through.
__________________
I am the very model of a moderator gentleman.
bermuDa is offline  
Old 05-06-2004, 06:59 PM   #32 (permalink)
Upright
 
Quote:
Am I the only one who views this law as a good thing
No, I think it is a good thing as well. To disagree with someone is not the same as being bigoted. If the majority of the people in the state want the law written one way or the other and it does not violate the state or federal constitution, let it pass.

As for the north/south debate, as someone who grew up in Wisconsin, and just moved away from Minnesota, I can testify that those states are amazingly bi-polar in thier politics. It has to do with where in the state you are. As for opinions in Dixie, I have been suprised by how liberal some of them are. It is all a matter of what demographic you talk to in that particular geographic region.
LowRider is offline  
Old 05-07-2004, 04:25 AM   #33 (permalink)
Little known...
 
Kostya's Avatar
 
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Soooooo,

What you're saying is, so long as the majority of people want it, that makes it a good thing?

Well, frankly, this just doesn't cut it in my opinion for several reasons.

Reason No 1. Such logic could lead us to conclude that so long as a majority of the population wanted to do something horrific like bring back slavery, invade Canada or take the vote away from left handed people, it would be a good thing. Clearly however, it wouldn't be a good thing for these things to happen, it would be very bad, and in fact gratuitous thing.

Reason No 2. If the majority of people are wrong, does this mean we ought to follow their will anyway? For instance, if 88% of Americans thought blue eyes were a sign of insanity, ought we therefore condemn all blue eyed people to insane asylums? No.

Reason No 3. Why is it that any group, even a majority, is able to make decisions which affect another. By this I mean, why is it that heterosexual people are able to say 'Gay people shouldn't be able to marry.' I mean, if gay people do marry, how does this hurt heterosexual people at all? This would be like Australians deciding New Zealanders aren't allowed to blow their noses after 5pm. Thus even if the majority decide they don't like gay marriage, it's got nothing to do with them. I don't like strawberry ice cream, I'd go as far to say that the majority of people don't like strawberry icecream, but if people eat strawberry icecream, what am I gonna do about it? Naught.
Kostya is offline  
Old 05-07-2004, 06:50 AM   #34 (permalink)
Upright
 
Quote:
Reason No 1. Such logic could lead us to conclude that so long as a majority of the population wanted to do something horrific like bring back slavery, invade Canada or take the vote away from left handed people, it would be a good thing. Clearly however, it wouldn't be a good thing for these things to happen, it would be very bad, and in fact gratuitous thing.
Bringing back slavery would violate the equal protection amendment of the constitution. It would also violate the 5th amendment by depriving someone of life, liberty or property without due process. Furthermore this is a spurious arguement, because it would never get past the courts.

Quote:
Reason No 2. If the majority of people are wrong, does this mean we ought to follow their will anyway? For instance, if 88% of Americans thought blue eyes were a sign of insanity, ought we therefore condemn all blue eyed people to insane asylums? No.
Again, no due process, and a opinion is vastly different from a fact. There are no such similar facts with regards to gay marriage.
Also, the assertion could be disproved by clinical testing for mental health, making it more a matter of education.

Reason No 3. Why is it that any group, even a majority, is able to make decisions which affect another. By this I mean, why is it that heterosexual people are able to say 'Gay people shouldn't be able to marry.' I mean, if gay people do marry, how does this hurt heterosexual people at all? This would be like Australians deciding New Zealanders aren't allowed to blow their noses after 5pm. Thus even if the majority decide they don't like gay marriage, it's got nothing to do with them. I don't like strawberry ice cream, I'd go as far to say that the majority of people don't like strawberry icecream, but if people eat strawberry icecream, what am I gonna do about it? Naught.

There are several tracks I can take with this. 1. That gay marriage is destructive to the family, which has been the basic operating unit of society since the mud hut and cave days. The government has a vested interest in protecting certain societal norms in the interest of public welfare. 2. There are those of us who think homosexuality is wrong in and of itself. It is not a great stretch to see why such people would also view homosexual marriage as wrong. 3. Do we really want to create a new set of "rights"? Right now, any man and any woman can marry each other, with respect to the prohibitions on incestious relationships and polygamy. Is it wise to change that just because a few people don't like the way the law is currently written? If we do so, then a precedent is set. Precedent is an important part of law and carries a lot of weight with courts. This decision would then be used as leverage to get other laws passed. It is the classic slippery slope theory. If laws are based on ever shifting public opinion, then there is no rule of law, in fact, it is based on mob rule.

To often when the wishes of the majority of the population are brought up, people forget that there is a Constitution with which to frame these desires. Some things will never happen, no matter how much some people may desire them; the establishment of an official state religion for example. It is this framework that ideally stands between us and the before mentioned mob rule. It is not my intention to lecture on US civics, but simply to add more context to what I have previously stated.



Last edited by LowRider; 05-07-2004 at 06:52 AM..
LowRider is offline  
Old 05-08-2004, 12:02 AM   #35 (permalink)
Little known...
 
Kostya's Avatar
 
Location: Brisbane, Australia
The first two points I made were not supposed to apply to the US as such, but were merely there to demonstrate that a simple majority does not imply rightness of action. Yes these things would be protected by the Constitution, but other situations, such as the one at hand apparently are not afforded the same priviledge.

Anyhow.

Quote:
Originally posted by LowRider
Again, no due process, and a opinion is vastly different from a fact. There are no such similar facts with regards to gay marriage.
Also, the assertion could be disproved by clinical testing for mental health, making it more a matter of education.

There are several tracks I can take with this. 1. That gay marriage is destructive to the family, which has been the basic operating unit of society since the mud hut and cave days. The government has a vested interest in protecting certain societal norms in the interest of public welfare. 2. There are those of us who think homosexuality is wrong in and of itself. It is not a great stretch to see why such people would also view homosexual marriage as wrong. 3. Do we really want to create a new set of "rights"? Right now, any man and any woman can marry each other, with respect to the prohibitions on incestious relationships and polygamy. Is it wise to change that just because a few people don't like the way the law is currently written? If we do so, then a precedent is set. Precedent is an important part of law and carries a lot of weight with courts. This decision would then be used as leverage to get other laws passed. It is the classic slippery slope theory. If laws are based on ever shifting public opinion, then there is no rule of law, in fact, it is based on mob rule.
1. Gay marriage is destructive to the family? How so?

2. Homosexuality is wrong in and of itself? How so?

3. As you said: 'Right now, any man and any woman can marry each other, with respect to the prohibitions on incestious relationships and polygamy.' How would this change? "Is it wise to change that just because a few people don't like the way the law is currently written? If we do so, then a precedent is set. Precedent is an important part of law and carries a lot of weight with courts. This decision would then be used as leverage to get other laws passed." Obviously this same argument could have been used against civil rights crusaders of the 1960's and 70's who wanted such crazy new 'rights' including equal pay for women and the right to vote for African Americans. Furthermore, from legal gay marriage, where do we have to slide?

Last edited by Kostya; 05-08-2004 at 12:06 AM..
Kostya is offline  
Old 05-08-2004, 06:48 PM   #36 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Location: British Columbia
As for destructive to the family, many things are much more destructive. What about men who leave their wife and 3 kids, often forcing the mother to work 2 or more jobs, to stay above the poverty line. What about parents who are so driven to make money that they work all day, and the children's needs are neglected as they are forced to grow up by themselves. These situations are not having laws passed agaisnt them, and they certainly are morally wrong, and destructive to the family
Eviltree is offline  
Old 05-09-2004, 03:15 AM   #37 (permalink)
Illusionary
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
VIRGINIA IS FOR LOVERS



*The State of virginia, in conjunction with the attorney general of said state, does not condone or in any way support the use, or participation of the term (s) love , lovers, or loving in reference to the state slogan. The phrase"Virginia is for lovers" is not intended to promote the act of loving in any way.The State of Viginia retains the right to forbid such acts, and prohibit any such version of the above stated terminology from inplying the freedom to participate in said acts. The state slogan is meant as a suggestion, and actual fornication of any type, whether public or otherwise, if involving two (or more) members of like gender, will result in immediate action, up to and including removal of all rights guaranteed under the constitution of the United States of America. The State of Viginia reserves the right to punish anyone who has a different opinion on this issue than it does, at anytime*
__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha
tecoyah is offline  
Old 05-09-2004, 05:39 AM   #38 (permalink)
follower of the child's crusade?
 
The State of Virginia, should be forced, by force if necessary, to accept full human rights for all its citizens... if a tiny minority of right wing people in power want to pass legislation like this that is deeply offensive to the majority of the people, throw them in jail for hate crimes...

if the US is not prepared to force these criminal laws to be abandoned, Virginia certainly should be expelled from the Union, immediately - all aid and protection must be withdrawn from them, either human rights must be accepted or Virginia isolated, because a law which bans gay couples from writing wills to each other is un-American and must not be tolerated in any circumstance.
__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas
Strange Famous is offline  
Old 05-09-2004, 07:11 AM   #39 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Kostya
Soooooo,

What you're saying is, so long as the majority of people want it, that makes it a good thing?

Well, frankly, this just doesn't cut it in my opinion for several reasons.
<snip>

Soooo. What you're saying is that you want to take the freedom to choose away from the people and revert to a monarchy? If the majority of the people want it, they should get it, provided it doesn't violate the constitution, in which case if you can get 2/3 of the people to want it, the constitution should be changed.

Democracy does not mean "government of, by, and for the people unless the people want something that offends Kostya."

If you don't like the way the majority of the people want things, you can work to change their opinion, or you can leave. You cannot override the majority just because YOU don't happen to like what they did.



Quote:
Originally posted by Strange Famous
if a tiny minority of right wing people in power want to pass legislation like this that is deeply offensive to the majority of the people, throw them in jail for hate crimes...
You're forgetting something. Who do you think elected these people? That's right, the majority of the people in Virginia. If most of the people dislike right-wing politics, maybe they should elect moderates or liberals next time.



I find this removal of rights as offensive as the next guy, but I also realize that these representatives who passed it did not suddenly decide to have these opinions overnight. They didn't run on a campaign of increased gay rights and then change their position once they were in office.

If the voters want decisions made the way they want them made, then it is the voters' responsibility to educate themselves as to the positions of the candidates and then elect the ones that agree with them.

This really all boils down to the fact that the vast majority of Americans either don't vote or don't bother to inform themselves about the people they're voting for. They'd rather watch The Apprentice than watch a show exploring where the candidates stand.

If the American people want to be sheep, then they get the government they deserve.
shakran is offline  
Old 05-09-2004, 03:39 PM   #40 (permalink)
Little known...
 
Kostya's Avatar
 
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Quote:
Originally posted by shakran
Soooo. What you're saying is that you want to take the freedom to choose away from the people and revert to a monarchy? If the majority of the people want it, they should get it, provided it doesn't violate the constitution, in which case if you can get 2/3 of the people to want it, the constitution should be changed.

Democracy does not mean "government of, by, and for the people unless the people want something that offends Kostya."

If you don't like the way the majority of the people want things, you can work to change their opinion, or you can leave. You cannot override the majority just because YOU don't happen to like what they did.
Hate to say it but...

The majority of Virginians... are wrong.
Kostya is offline  
 

Tags
negative, state, virginia

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:18 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360