Utah won't recognize same-sex marriages

Jan 8, 2014 Full story: KCRA-TV Sacramento 338

Once you're logged in, at the top of each article, video or slideshow you will see a list of your Facebook friends who recently visited Choose to share stories you'e read with your friends or turn sharing OFF to keep your reading experience anonymous .

Full Story
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#253 Jan 14, 2014
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Please define what a fundamental right is.
Breathing, moving about the country. You have it at birth, no need to pay a fee, register or abide by some other person's regulations and rules.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#254 Jan 14, 2014
Christsharia Law wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope for the sake of humanity you're just a troll laughing as you post.
You've heard that marriage is a right because the US Supreme Court has said so.
Gun ownership is a right, I am told. You need to pay for certain things to own a gun.
Your premise is beyond stupid, as usual.
I've never heard the supreme court say that gay marriage was a fundamental right.
Gun ownership may be a 'right' but looks very much like a privilege, similar to a driver's license. You also have a right to own property but you don't really own it, you just rent it from your city or town.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#255 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
If marriage were a fundamental right there would be no fees, certificates or regulations. Yes, I've heard it called a fundamental right but it obviously isn't.
Wonderbread, rights are subject to regulation. That doesn't mean they are not rights. Were you old enough to drive and had taken a couple civics courses, you might be able to comprehend this. Now, run along and play, the adults are having a serious conversation.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#256 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Breathing, moving about the country. You have it at birth, no need to pay a fee, register or abide by some other person's regulations and rules.
So the right to bear arms isn't a fundamental right? The NRA won't be very happy to hear that!

How about free speech & freedom of religion?

According to the SCOTUS, all the enumerated rights (among others) are fundamental rights.

ALL rights can be restricted, fundamental or not.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#257 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never heard the supreme court say that gay marriage was a fundamental right.
Gun ownership may be a 'right' but looks very much like a privilege, similar to a driver's license. You also have a right to own property but you don't really own it, you just rent it from your city or town.
The Supreme Court HAS said marriage is a fundamental right multiple times. The only dispute going on is a person can be restricted from exercising that fundamental right based solely on the gender of the person they wish to marry.

Same as the previous dispute on whether a person could be restricted from exercising that fundamental right based solely on the race of the person they wished to marry.

More and more the courts are saying the right CAN'T be restricted based on gender.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#258 Jan 14, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
So the right to bear arms isn't a fundamental right? The NRA won't be very happy to hear that!
How about free speech & freedom of religion?
According to the SCOTUS, all the enumerated rights (among others) are fundamental rights.
ALL rights can be restricted, fundamental or not.
Wondering has a positively childlike understanding of the world.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#259 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never heard the supreme court say that gay marriage was a fundamental right.
Gun ownership may be a 'right' but looks very much like a privilege, similar to a driver's license. You also have a right to own property but you don't really own it, you just rent it from your city or town.
Btw, privileges aren't enumerated in the Constitution. That's how you can tell gun ownership is a right, no matter what it looks like.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#260 Jan 14, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
So the right to bear arms isn't a fundamental right?
What part of "Gun ownership may be a 'right' " has you confused?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#261 Jan 14, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
The Supreme Court HAS said marriage is a fundamental right multiple times.
Yes, and each time it involved one man and one woman. Never a same sex couple.
They also said that the regulation of marriage was a state issue.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#262 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
Yes, and each time it involved one man and one woman. Never a same sex couple.
They also said that the regulation of marriage was a state issue.
Wondering, what governmental interest is served by limiting marriage to being between a man and a woman?

You've been asked this question many times, but you have yet to offer an answer that has a sound basis in logic or reason.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#263 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "Gun ownership may be a 'right' " has you confused?
You're the moron who claimed fundamental rights can't be restricted, and yet there are many restrictions on who can buy or own a gun.

Obviously YOU are the idiot who is confused as usual.

“TAKIA AND TA TONKA”

Since: Aug 08

HAPPY TOGETHER!!!

#264 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and each time it involved one man and one woman. Never a same sex couple.
They also said that the regulation of marriage was a state issue.
That may be true......but where did SCOTUS EVER actually declare in ANY of the 14 rulings regarding marriage did they ACTUALLY say that Marriage is a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT ONLY FOR A MAN AND A WOMAN? My guess is they NEVER actually stated it was just for a man and a woman.......and that is the issue here........if marriage is TRULY a Fundamental Right.......then it HAS to be fundamental for EVERYONE without regard to the specific genders!!!

See, there is NO such thing as "SAME-SEX" Marriage........and the question that needs to be asked of SCOTUS is this......is marriage a Fundamental Right without regards to the genders of the couple involved or is it truly only a fundamental right for opposite-sex couples? Once this question is asked.......my guess is SCOTUS will answer it as it should and that is WITHOUT regard to the genders of the couple!!!

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#265 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, and each time it involved one man and one woman. Never a same sex couple.
They also said that the regulation of marriage was a state issue.
And if each time it involved a Christian man and woman, would that mean marriage is only a fundamental right for opposite-sex Christians?

How about if each time it involved a right-handed man and woman? Would that mean marriage is only a fundamental right for right-handed opposite-sex couples?

Nope, the SCOTUS ruled marriage is a fundamental right- nothing more, nothing less, no qualifiers involved.

If the regulation of marriage was solely a state issue, then inter-racial marriage bans would still stand, and polygamy would be legal.
Christaliban

Philadelphia, PA

#266 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I've never heard the supreme court say that gay marriage was a fundamental right.
Gun ownership may be a 'right' but looks very much like a privilege, similar to a driver's license. You also have a right to own property but you don't really own it, you just rent it from your city or town.
Hey you dumb pos, that was not the point you were earlier trying to make.

You were trying to claim the current (yet stayed) decision regarding UT was "wrong."

It's not wrong or invalid until a higher court says it's wrong. A court has not said so.

Regarding this, your latest attempt to dissemble, the Supreme Court has not yet said all states must have marriage equality. It has said that states with marriage equality by whatever means will have those marriages recognized federally.

You stupid bigot.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#267 Jan 14, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
You're the moron who claimed fundamental rights can't be restricted, and yet there are many restrictions on who can buy or own a gun.
There are even limits to free speech.

I don't think Wondering can even comprehend how foolish they regularly make themselves look.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#268 Jan 14, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "Gun ownership may be a 'right' " has you confused?
It is written in the second amendment; gun ownership is not a fundamental right. You need to do your homework pal.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#269 Jan 14, 2014
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And if each time it involved a Christian man and woman, would that mean marriage is only a fundamental right for opposite-sex Christians?
That's a stupid question.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#270 Jan 14, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
There are even limits to free speech.
I don't think Wondering can even comprehend how foolish they regularly make themselves look.
True. Overstepping the bounds by inciting violence is outside that protection. Free speech comes with responsibilities. For example, if one directly advocates an illegal uprising or harm to others, there is no protection. In a legal sense, the harm must take place before prosecution unless. it is deemed a act of treason which can be dealt with proactively. People on the internet and talk show hosts often step over the line. Proactive prosecution requires conspiratal connections. The political implications are immense. As a country, we are so busy throwing mud that we miss the real picture.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#271 Jan 14, 2014
Christaliban wrote:
It's not wrong or invalid
It's both.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#272 Jan 14, 2014
Christaliban wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey you dumb pos, that was not the point you were earlier trying to make.
You were trying to claim the current (yet stayed) decision regarding UT was "wrong."
It's not wrong or invalid until a higher court says it's wrong. A court has not said so.
Regarding this, your latest attempt to dissemble, the Supreme Court has not yet said all states must have marriage equality. It has said that states with marriage equality by whatever means will have those marriages recognized federally.
You stupid bigot.
By dropping the personal remark, your post is much stronger.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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
Arkansas AG asks court to uphold gay marriage ban 2 min NE Jade 7
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 4 min jeffry helms 55,858
Stay issued in Indiana gay marriage ban case 8 min RalphB 11
Once more on fascism knocking on the Balkan doo... (Aug '09) 13 min Tomica Teklic 1,744
'Don't Say Gay' bill clears TN Senate (May '11) 36 min Wondering 72
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 38 min h-elms 200,936
Los Angeles doctor asks feds to study why menin... 1 hr Yakitori 6
Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? 1 hr Wondering 455
Gay marriage cases await early Supreme Court de... 7 hr Frankie Rizzo 361
US judge upholds state same-sex marriage ban, r... 9 hr Evilgelicalling 728
Biggest Gay Lies 15 hr Phobos 1,996
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••