How many other Rights are your willing to give up?

  • Aquanerd

    Posts: 845

    Apr 16, 2009 4:10 PM GMT
    ...to get the right to marry?
  • TexanMan82

    Posts: 893

    Apr 16, 2009 4:17 PM GMT
    None
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2009 4:19 PM GMT
    How many babies are you willing to eat for gay marriage?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2009 4:20 PM GMT
    Not willing to give up any rights...but fry up some babies and I'm there icon_twisted.gif
  • Aquanerd

    Posts: 845

    Apr 16, 2009 4:26 PM GMT
    It looks like most Obama supporters are willing to do away with the Tenth Bill of Rights.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2009 4:45 PM GMT
    I would like DOMA to be repealed. How is that for state's rights?
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Apr 17, 2009 9:54 AM GMT
    Aquanerd saidIt looks like most Obama supporters are willing to do away with the Tenth Bill of Rights.


    icon_confused.gif
    I'll assume that your alluding to the 10th Amendment to the Constitution

    What has That got to do with Gay Marriage?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 10:01 AM GMT
    around 23 rights give or take 5.
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Apr 17, 2009 10:37 AM GMT
    Yeah if that is the case then DOMA is a violation of that amendment, so are federal laws supporting marriage (let each state decide it's own laws), and the supreme court's ruling on interracial marriages should be nullified so whites can only marry blacks in states that have voted to allow it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 10:43 AM GMT
    Aquanerd said...to get the right to marry?


    None. If I want to marry someone, I will. I don't need a piece of paper to say shit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 10:48 AM GMT
    The original intent of the Tenth Amendment was to further limit the power of the Federal government with regard to States rights. But it became amended during debate, and the version finally ratified is generally recognized to be a truism (a statement that is obviously true and says nothing new or interesting). In United States v. Sprague (1931) the Supreme Court noted that the Tenth Amendment "added nothing to the [Constitution] as originally ratified."

    The Tenth therefore does not in fact amend any other part of the Constitution, particularly the Necessary and Proper Clause which was the goal. The Supreme Court has only referenced the amendment in a decision a few times in its history, using the N&C Clause instead for similar cases.

    [Article I, Section 8, Clause 18: The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.]

    The amendment could in fact be repealed without any change to the way the Constitution is interpreted. So what's it all mean? It's a resurrection of the old States Rights battle, that was used to defend segregation until the early 1960s, and is now being dusted off to oppose gay rights.

    The homophobes are afraid Obama & Congress might repeal DOMA, and grant gays the same rights that other citizens have (not "special" rights as our opponents like to scream). If that happened, the 'phobes claim the moribund Tenth Amendment will have been violated, the Federal government trampling on the right of the States to make gays second-class citizens.

    Thank you for the Republican right-wing talking points, Aquanerd. Same basic states rights legal arguments Governor Orval Faubus used when he stood on the steps to block Black students from entering the Little Rock Central High School in 1957. Same arguments being used today to block gays from entering City Hall to be married.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 10:53 AM GMT
    How many rights are you willing to give up to the NSA, CIA, US Gov, Homeland Sec., etc. feel "safer?"
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 11:00 AM GMT
    Touche, Red Vespa,touche. Loved reading every word of it! Thank you.

    Now that this topic seems to have been squashed, lets see just how long it continues.....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 11:21 AM GMT
    Michael_Mccarry saidTouche, Red Vespa,touche. Loved reading every word of it! Thank you.

    You're very welcome. Now see how ancient Britons dealt with the issue of personal rights: icon_rolleyes.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 11:29 AM GMT
    cjcscuba1984 saidHow many rights are you willing to give up to the NSA, CIA, US Gov, Homeland Sec., etc. feel "safer?"


    Bingo. And "feel" is a large part of the deal...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 11:46 AM GMT
    no one can dissect a social point like Monty Python...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 12:47 PM GMT
    NONE. No trade offs, compromises or bartering! WTH mylife is not a market place or a flea market!icon_biggrin.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 1:52 PM GMT
    This whole thing is a false argument on several levels, as I already posted above. No one is LOSING rights, but GAINING ones we should never have been denied in the first place.

    This is not a trade-off, but an identification and consolidation of civil rights to which we were always entitled. We are losing no rights in return for other rights. We are OBTAINING rights, not swapping them.

    But this is the false choice that Republicans are trying to sell to the public with their talking points, echoed by some here. They claim that if gays gain anything, everyone loses something else. Listen to their propaganda, it always contains that element of loss, a phony price they put on gays, or even on ordinary citizens, for exercising our Constitutional freedoms.

    And it's rather the Republicans who had actually trampled the Constitution under the Bush Administration, with warrant-less searches & surveillance, ignoring of Habeas Corpus and the right to a speedy trial and to face witnesses and see evidence, to limitations on Free Speech, and blocking the exercise of the Constitutionally-guaranteed role of the people's representatives in Congress to oversee & participate in certain actions.

    Those are some real rights we truly did lose, not the loss of questionable concepts of States Rights being misused to practice discrimination on the local level. As was done by right-wingers during the Civil Rights Era, as is being done again today. Shall we call this the Gay Rights Era?

    Reject this false argument of giving up other rights for gay rights! Don't debate it in those terms. When you do so you are falling into the trap the Republicans have made for us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 1:54 PM GMT
    Aquanerd said...to get the right to marry?


    none
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 2:58 PM GMT
    "How many other Rights are your willing to give up? ...to get the right to marry?"

    We're in Canada. No one had to give up ANY rights for us to get the right to marry.

    Flame-bait....on a scale of 1 - 10 we give this a 9.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 3:03 PM GMT
    Not giving up any rights, thank you!

    I would like the straights to give up their right to create children - they do create some stupid lil' ones!!! It's a generalization, yes. But, an easy resolution. All the gays can just adopt foreign babies and we can repopulate the country with children that aren't warped, selfish, and full of shit!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 17, 2009 3:11 PM GMT
    I like all of my rights. I don't want to give up any! RON PAUL!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 19, 2009 12:48 AM GMT
    mtbkrguy08 saidI like all of my rights. I don't want to give up any! RON PAUL!!!


    Except Ron Paul would probably veto an equal rights admendment for you and all gays (i.e. reversing DOMA).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 19, 2009 12:56 AM GMT
    All I know is the government and the church needs to stop acting like a dating service.

    And Aquanerd what do you mean by 'other rights'? Don't know if I missed something.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 19, 2009 1:01 AM GMT
    Aquanerd said...to get the right to marry?


    NADA

    Zilch

    Zero

    None