Send a Message
to JDTanuki

Comments

70

Joined

Jun 16, 2011

JDTanuki Profile

Forums Owned

Recent Posts

Gay/Lesbian

(Wisconsin) Dane County judge allows domestic partnership...

This article makes it obvious that much of the anti-gay groups out there are NOT attempting to "protect marriage"; they are out to ensure that the government offers no recognition of homosexuals. Looking at the 'domestic partner registry" here, there is no substantial similarity with the institution of marriage - "substantial similarity" being the exact words used in the amendment banning same-sex marriage in the state. Hell, before the domestic partnership registry was implemented, it was provided with legal scrutiny based on the same case that was cited in passage of the state's constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and found that the registry did not include that core of benefits that would make it 'similar' to marriage. So let's call these folks what they are: irrational bigots, looking to ensure that homosexuals have NO rights and are relegated to the status of second-class citizens (or lower). They aren't defending anything, save their own coddled hatred and ignorance.  (Jun 21, 2011 | post #8)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

If your teachers told you that, then they were either simplifying the issue, they were absolutely incorrect, or you weren't paying attention in later classes where they provided the real classification into which our government falls. The United States is a constitutional democratic republic. That means that a democratic vote is held to elect government officials to key offices, and that direct democratic intervention can lead to implementation of new or alteration of some existing law, but that certain concepts, outlined in a core document (i.e., the Constitution) are beyond sway of the majority or even their elected officials.  (Jun 21, 2011 | post #79569)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

The 19th amendment spoke to voting specifically - that was it. There were a number of other issues involving women that were covered by the 14th amendment - land ownership, the right to apply to and pass the bar exam and be granted a license to practice law, and the ability to enter into a legal contract without consent from a related male, for example. Regarding the 19th amendment: I've found it be generally accepted that the 14th amendment was what made the 19th amendment possible at all; early calls and cases regarding suffrage were based on the first article of the 14th. If you'd like a larger excerpt, feel free to check here: http://womenshisto ry.about.com/od/la ws/a/equal_protect .htm Regardless of the primary reason for which the 14th amendment was penned, it has been cited in numerous issues NOT related to race in any way.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #79302)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Depends on the flavor of Christianity involved. But of course, 'God's' word is universal and beyond dispute... ;)  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #79226)

Gay/Lesbian

Same-sex marriage goes down to legislative wire in New York

Pretty sure that he meant that you were conscious of what you had relayed, not that you "know it all". i.e., you're aware of it, they're aware of it. hi hi and I have chatted somewhat in other areas; pretty certain he did not mean to imply (insultingly) that you were omnipotent.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #28)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Please learn some reading comprehension before responding to my posts, Ronald - and also learn that your words should not be placed in my mouth. This is the last response that you will have from me, because you are not interested in a debate, but in trying (and failing) to be witty.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #79221)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

If a homosexual judge cannot rule with impartiality on an issue pertaining to homosexuality, then a heterosexual cannot rule on an issue pertaining to heterosexuality. Based on the argument that same-sex marriage somehow threatens heterosexual marriage and the family (a point common to anti-marriage equality activists), a married judge cannot rule impartially on the issue. One could even argue that an unmarried judge, but one that had immediate family, could not do so either. Note that the proponents of Proposition 8 seemed to be aware of Judge Walker's sexuality during the trial (based on a number of comments they made to that end); they had a chance then to protest, and did not.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #79211)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Really? That's strange - the last time that I looked at the Constitution, there was not a single mention of Jesus, Christianity, or God. For a philosophy that was supposedly "wrapped up in Judeo Christian Philophsy", it's strangely lacking in any sort of indicative phrasing. As for the remainder of your points: Your statement implied that homosexuality was supposedly unnatural. I showed what that statement is utterly incorrect. You counter by going off on a tangent that seems to try and equate homosexuality to a birth defect that threatens the survival of the species. I will counter this simply by stating that homosexuality has been recorded throughout history, even since Biblical times, and that despite that, the species thrives. Homosexuality is not sterility. A homosexual man or woman can reproduce - and, as I mentioned earlier, they can do so without ever engaging in sexual intercourse (i.e., artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization). Just because I choose not to sleep with women does not mean that I cannot quite easily propagate my genes to ensure the future of the species.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #79210)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Actually, the United States is based on numerous legal concepts from many different cultures and religions, not just Christianity. Madison and Jefferson reference Greek and Roman legal philosophy numerous times in their various writings, as do a number of the other prominent founding fathers. However, though I recognize that a number of our country's legal concepts derive from ideas commonly found in Judeo-Christian nations of old, I also recognize that those ideas were adopted not because they were Judeo-Christian in nature, but because they were philosophically-so und and meshed well with the type of government the founding fathers were attempting to create. Finally, in regards to your statement about nature: There are 300 non-human animal species that have exhibited homosexual behavior, distinct from dominance behavior. For instance, a pair of male penguins at the zoo in Central Park in New York became 'pair-bonded', performing all of the same mating rituals exhibited by a male-female couple of penguins; eventually, the zookeepers, upon finding an egg that had been pushed from a nest of its biological parents, gave the egg to the two male penguins; who proceeded to hatch the egg and raise the chick just as a male-female couple would.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #79187)

Gay/Lesbian

Gay Marriage Bill Enters Last Day Of Session

Your last sentence is so ridiculous that it actually made me laugh out loud. Covering more spouses means more money for the insurance companies. Getting married and buying insurance isn't a two-for-one deal; you still pay more when you get married. What you're saying is that the insurance companies are going to turn down more money because of the sex of the spouse. The idea of a money-grubbing industry like the insurance industry turning down money because of the sexual orientation of the couple is 'ridonkulous' (in that it's both ridiculous and shows how much of an ass you are).  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #3)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

You mean 'Their', I'm fairly certain? If you'd like anyone to take you seriously, try practicing proper grammar and spelling in your posts. So far, every post that you've made has been a thinly-veiled insult, mostly in the form of a comparison that is weak at best. Perhaps you should evaluate the quality of your own posts before you start judging the posts of others.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #79127)

Gay/Lesbian

Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Why do you claim that we're "redefining " something that is not defined in the Constitution to begin with? As for why civil unions are "not enough", feel free to read up on the concept of separate but equal, and you'll have your answer. Oh, and as for the whole "island" thing? Give me a turkey baster and the island's population will reproduce with no direct sexual contact between a man and a woman.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #79126)

Gay/Lesbian

Nepal hosts 1st public lesbian wedding ceremony

I applaud Nepal and envy them. At the same time, I remain sad that many in the the United States - supposedly such a progressive nation - still languish under the absolutely false notion that the rights of the minority somehow fall under the sway of the will of the majority.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #3)

Gay/Lesbian

Same-sex marriage goes down to legislative wire in New York

I'm crossing my fingers here in sunny Arizona, hoping that New York state equality wins today. If it does, it will send a very loud, very clear message to those who attempted to influence this vote with their dollars and their political savvy: In a democratic republic, the rights of both the majority and the minority are protected from "the tyranny of the majority".  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #13)

Gay/Lesbian

Same-sex marriage will lead to polygamy, says Archbishop ...

Majoring on a minor? What language are you speaking? I'll simply note here that one can easily follow the chain of our discussion back to see that you were the one who first resorted to ad hominem attacks. I respond in kind, because those who fail to extend courtesy deserve none. And with that, I'm done wasting electrons on you. As Rev points out, your sort of puffed-up misplaced sense of importance will ensure that you'll be pompous and ignorant until the day that you die. Have fun with that.  (Jun 20, 2011 | post #99)