Christie Asks for Stay of Gay Marriage Deadline

Oct 2, 2013 Full story: WKXW-FM Trenton 58

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's administration on Tuesday asked a judge to delay implementation of her order that the state allow gay marriage until an appeal can be decided, saying the state will suffer "irreparable harm" if same-sex marriages are allowed without its highest court weighing in.

Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#53 Oct 3, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
My definition is black Americans receiving so-called "affirmative action" and preferential treatment in job hiring and being admitted to schools with lower test scores than white Americans or Asian-Americans.
...and why does that happen, oh great and wise one?

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#54 Oct 3, 2013
Neil An Blowme wrote:
<quoted text>
...and why does that happen, oh great and wise one?
Because Democrats are p***sies, and cower and bow to the rabble-rousers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley who are always running around the country leading the riots for this sort of thing.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#55 Oct 3, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Because Democrats are p***sies, and cower and bow to the rabble-rousers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley who are always running around the country leading the riots for this sort of thing.
Um. Yeah. Cause that's why.(rolling eyes)

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#56 Oct 3, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Um. Yeah. Cause that's why.(rolling eyes)
OK. Since I assume you disagree with my inciteful (sic) analysis, then what is your explanation ? I eagerly await your scholarly elucidation on the subject.:)

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#57 Oct 3, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
OK. Since I assume you disagree with my inciteful (sic) analysis, then what is your explanation ? I eagerly await your scholarly elucidation on the subject.:)
If this was an Affirmative Action discussion, I'd be happy to discuss it with you, but I don't like taking these threads off topic like that. The trolls are allowed to do it way too often. I don't want to be part of that problem.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#58 Oct 3, 2013
AnyTime wrote:
<quoted text>
Special is when you change the definition of marriage so two queers can marry. That's special treatment. Special is when a judge rules it's ok for a queer to go into a woman's bathroom cause he's feels like a woman inside. That's special treatment.
Wow. I love it when uneducated numbnuts like yourself throw yourselves into discussions you know absolutely nothing about!

"Marriage" is defined as a "union", a "ceremony" and an "institution". The gender make up of the participants doesn't change those definitions.

"a queer" can be either a male or a female. Females use the woman's bathroom. Sorry that upsets you so.

The judges ruling you are discussing was about a transgendered individual, not a gay individual. They are two completely different things. And no special right was given. All individuals are still free to use the bathroom they identify with, and no one is being forced to use a bathroom they don't identify with. No special privileges for anyone, just equal treatment.

Feel free to try again though dear.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#63 Oct 3, 2013
Again, the reason we have a constitution is to prohibit majoraties from restricting equal protections of the law from unpopular minorities. The 14th prohibits state laws from restricting equal rights.

Supreme Court:
"Congress... cannot deny the liberty protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
...the principal purpose and the necessary effect of this law are to demean those persons who are in a lawful same-sex marriage. This requires the Court to hold, as it now does, that DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

The liberty protected by the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause contains within it the prohibition against denying to any person the equal protection of the laws. While the Fifth Amendment itself withdraws from the Government the power to degrade or demean in the way this law does, the equal protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment makes that Fifth Amendment right all the more specific and all the better understood and preserved."
Windsor

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#64 Oct 3, 2013

Laws that deny equality, stigmatize those being denied. This stigma affects how they are treated in a wide variety of situations, and can affect how they view themselves when the government tells them they are not worthy of equal treatment.

The Supreme Court ruled on the matter of "separate but equal" in the 1954 case Brown v. Board of Education. The court recognized that "separate but equal" opportunities created a feeling of inferiority for the minorities being segregated, and that this feeling of segregation could cause permanent emotional injury. It was the feeling of segregation and therefore inferiority that caused the court to determine separate could not be equal.

"The statutory provisions that continue to limit access to this designation exclusively to opposite sex couples likely will be viewed as an official statement that the family relationship of same sex couples are not of comparable stature or equal dignity to the family relationship of opposite-sex couples." (p.118 In Re Marriage)

This official support of prejudice perpetuates and promotes it as well. This prejudice causes needless stress, suffering, attacks from others, and harm in a wide variety of ways and degrees.

Thousands of years of history, literature as well as reason, logic, and law, should all tell you what social science has clearly shown since the beginning: prejudice and discrimination cause needless suffering and death.

Since: Jun 11

AOL

#65 Oct 3, 2013
The Equal Protection Clause “‘neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.’” Id., at 623 (quoting Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, 559 (1896)

"But the State cannot single out one identifiable class of citizens for punishment that does not apply to everyone else, with moral disapproval as the only asserted state interest for the law.

A legislative classification that threatens the creation of an underclass … cannot be reconciled with” the Equal Protection Clause. Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S., at 239

“The framers of the Constitution knew, and we should not forget today, that there is no more effective practical guaranty against arbitrary and unreasonable government than to require that the principles of law which officials would impose upon a minority be imposed generally. Conversely, nothing opens the door to arbitrary action so effectively as to allow those officials to pick and choose only a few to whom they will apply legislation and thus to escape the political retribution that might be visited upon them if larger numbers were affected.” Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. New York, 336 U.S. 106,

Equal protection is not just a promise of the founding documents, it is a requirement of Article 4, and both the 5th and 14th amendments.
Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#66 Oct 4, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Because Democrats are p***sies, and cower and bow to the rabble-rousers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Tawana Brawley who are always running around the country leading the riots for this sort of thing.
yeah, right....

Affirmative action is intended to promote the opportunities of defined minority groups within a society to give them access equal to that of the privileged majority population.

It is often instituted in government and educational settings to ensure that certain designated "minority groups" within a society are included "in all programs". The stated justification for affirmative action by its proponents is that it helps to compensate for past discrimination, persecution or exploitation by the ruling class of a culture, and to address existing discrimination. The implementation of affirmative action, especially in the United States, is considered by its proponents to be justified by disparate impact.

I thought you were 'fair and balanced'...... Seems to me you are mean-spirited and racist.
Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#67 Oct 4, 2013
SameTime wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not gay, you're a shiteating drag queen fagg@t
yawn

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#68 Oct 4, 2013
SameTime wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, I love it when uneducated queers, like you, are so full of sh!t, it spits out when you open your mouth. Now get lost, you shiteating fagg@t
Was that your rebuttle? Thanks for proving my point dolt!

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#70 Oct 4, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Christie isn't stupid enough to believe that the highest court hasn't already weighed in. But he's banking on the fact that the people he's addressing ARE stupid enough to believe that. And he's probably right.
It seems that politicians can just make up any crazy lie they want to anymore and the media just sits there nodding their head and reporting it as if it's fact. And media's consumers simply pick and choose with version they like the most and believe that.
What's the point of having a free press when no one is bothering to use it??
I think it's a remarkably power-grabbing statement to refer to Judicial Rulings as "weighing in".

In fact, it really pisses me off quite a bit.

He isn't the one to be talking about "weighing" anything. I suspect that his scales are adjusted to lie.
Neil An Blowme

Hoboken, NJ

#71 Oct 4, 2013
Dixieland wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what you queer PedophiIes do right before you swallow.
You would know
Rambeaux

Philadelphia, PA

#73 Oct 4, 2013
Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Where in the heck are you going to find a straight person looking to marry a gay person?
.
Are you volunteering; sugar?
Quite often a gay or lesbian will pretend to be hetosexual in order to marry a person of the opposite sex. It happened to my brother; after 5 years of marriage he found out his wife was lesbian. It also happened to Dana McGreevey when she found out her husband (former gov. of NJ) was gay. This is why I'm no longer opposed to same-sex marriage.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#74 Oct 4, 2013
Come on folks, time to face the fact, there is no rational argument against gay marriage! Don't like the idea? Don't marry someone of the same sex. Get invited to a gay wedding? Don't even RSVP.

Since: Mar 07

Rhoadesville, VA

#75 Oct 5, 2013
Rambeaux wrote:
<quoted text>Quite often a gay or lesbian will pretend to be hetosexual in order to marry a person of the opposite sex. It happened to my brother; after 5 years of marriage he found out his wife was lesbian. It also happened to Dana McGreevey when she found out her husband (former gov. of NJ) was gay. This is why I'm no longer opposed to same-sex marriage.
It happens less, now, thank goodness. A friend of mine had her husband leave after one week of marriage - he was gay and couldn't stand the strain of the lies. It was horrible for her.

It's ALWAYS better for people to form marital relationships with people they can be attracted to and love romantically. Bowing to familial pressure to form a loveless marriage of convenience only brings heartbreak.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#76 Oct 5, 2013
Rambeaux wrote:
<quoted text>Quite often a gay or lesbian will pretend to be hetosexual in order to marry a person of the opposite sex. It happened to my brother; after 5 years of marriage he found out his wife was lesbian. It also happened to Dana McGreevey when she found out her husband (former gov. of NJ) was gay. This is why I'm no longer opposed to same-sex marriage.
I personally know 2 guys who married in their 20's, and both unknowingly married lesbians. Both men divorced.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 5 min Reverend Alan 15,651
Texas lawmaker married five times files error-f... 13 min Rick Perry s Closet 1
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 17 min NoahLovesU 57,910
U.S. judge rules Nebraska same-sex marriage ban... 19 min Patrick 7
Lesbian Couple's Gay Pride Flag Burned By Neighbor 19 min Good Question 16
Think Jade ever solved her/im hygiene issues? 24 min Bison 5
Biggest Gay Lies (May '14) 36 min NoahLovesU 3,229
Is Jeb Bush 'evolving' on same-sex marriage and... 55 min Lawrence Wolf 138
Transgender Bruce Jenner will be lesbian after ... 3 hr zyondra 121
More from around the web