You are viewing an archived version of the site which is no longer maintained.
Go to the current live site or the Adventure Gamers forums
Adventure Gamers

Home Adventure Forums Misc. Chit Chat Massachusetts court rules ban on gay marriage unconstitutional


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-18-2003, 02:29 PM   #1
The Robot Head of Love
 
zarathustrian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 254
Send a message via ICQ to zarathustrian Send a message via AIM to zarathustrian Send a message via MSN to zarathustrian Send a message via Yahoo to zarathustrian
Default Massachusetts court rules ban on gay marriage unconstitutional



Massachusetts court rules ban on gay marriage unconstitutional


I particularly like Bush's remarks:
Quote:
President Bush waded into the debate with a statement criticizing the ruling.

"Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman," he said. "Today's decision ... violates this important principle. I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage."
What a dolt.
__________________
I got a fever! And the only prescription...is more cowbell!
zarathustrian is offline  
Old 11-18-2003, 02:53 PM   #2
Kosmonaut
 
Phil25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the moon in the 1500's
Posts: 353
Send a message via AIM to Phil25 Send a message via MSN to Phil25
Default

Say what you want about our man Chretien, at least he never said anything that stupid. Oh Chretien...the memories...
[Montage of Prime Minister doing various activities: holding a press conference, speaking in the house of commons, lawn mowing, getting pied, strangling a protestor]

Sigh...oh, what were we talking about?

Phil25 is offline  
Old 11-18-2003, 06:42 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Titan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 177
Default

Is it doltish to put out a statement that, according to polling, 60% of Americans believe is the case?

Or is it that you believe it is doltish that Bush really believes what he is saying?

If the latter, then you are of course saying that 60% of Americans are doltish. While you would get agreement from the majority at this site on that point, all polling in Canada and Europe indicates a belief in his doltishness, but a respect for the American people. That sorta' flies in the face of intellectual honesty to say the least.
Titan is offline  
Old 11-18-2003, 07:53 PM   #4
soffistical
 
emma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 460
Default

However, supressing/opressing a minority in society never makes it okay because a majority wishes to do that. It doesn't matter which arguments are used when these things happens. We are all equal or not, can't be reasoned away. So say it like it is, some people are just not worth as much as I am, or shut up about it. Can't have basic rights for people and at the same time denying certain groups the very same rights.
__________________
I haven't lost my mind, it's backed up on a disc somewhere.
My DVDs | My Photos | TorrentMind

Last edited by emma; 11-18-2003 at 08:26 PM.
emma is offline  
Old 11-18-2003, 09:30 PM   #5
A search for a crazy man!
 
remixor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,987
Send a message via ICQ to remixor Send a message via AIM to remixor Send a message via MSN to remixor
Default

Hooray for Massachusetts!

I already expect Bush to have the feelings he does; I'm over it. However, it pleases me that a judicial court would rule this way. It's not something I WOULDN'T expect, but it's not something I'd have been certain about either.
__________________
Chris "News Editor" Remo

Some sort of Writer or Editor or Something, Idle Thumbs

"Some comparisons are a little less obvious. I always think of Grim Fandango as Casablanca on acid." - Will Wright
remixor is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 01:12 AM   #6
Whinging Pom
 
DomStLeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: London, England, UK
Posts: 1,032
Send a message via ICQ to DomStLeger Send a message via MSN to DomStLeger
Default

I'd just like to point out theres a difference between a legal marriage and a religious marriage. I think Bush is confusing the matter, which is especially wrong in a country that is supposedly secular. The issue should have nothing to do with the religious defnition of marriage at all, and merely the extension of rights gained in the legal act of marriage to anyone who wants to make that commitment. The sooner he accepts that the better for everyone.
__________________
Dom
Currently Playing Tex Murphey - Under a Killing Moon (YAY GOG.com!)
Recently Completed Broken Sword Director's Cut
Still Get Mozilla Firefox! Forget that Chrome and IE rubbish!
DomStLeger is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 01:47 AM   #7
Puts the 'e' in Mark
 
Marek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,138
Default

May God Bless America.

Secular?
Marek is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 02:52 AM   #8
The Reggienator
 
Kolzig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Vaasa, Finland
Posts: 5,519
Send a message via ICQ to Kolzig Send a message via MSN to Kolzig
Default

America, the country I'll never be able to fully understand.

That Bush guy surely is a strange man...
Kolzig is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 03:49 AM   #9
comfortably numb
 
Swordmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 541
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marek
Secular?
Britannica.com:
Quote:
Main Entry: 1sec·u·lar
Pronunciation: 'se-ky&-l&r
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French seculer, from Late Latin saecularis, from saeculum the present world, from Latin, generation, age, century, world; akin to Welsh hoedl lifetime
Date: 14th century
1 a : of or relating to the worldly or temporal <secular concerns> b : not overtly or specifically religious <secular music> c : not ecclesiastical or clerical <secular courts> <secular landowners>
2 : not bound by monastic vows or rules; specifically : of, relating to, or forming clergy not belonging to a religious order or congregation <a secular priest>
3 a : occurring once in an age or a century b : existing or continuing through ages or centuries c : of or relating to a long term of indefinite duration

Swordmaster is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 04:08 AM   #10
Liver of Life
 
Zygomaticus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,317
Default

Some people seem to follow a set of non-existant universal World Laws to base their judgement. I doubt there's anything said in "World Law" about Gay marriages being wrong or illegal. Nor is there any such thing in the Constitution, as far as my knowledge goes.
Zygomaticus is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 05:21 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Ninja Dodo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,459
Default

A lot of people seem to think it says so in the bible anyway... (note: I'm not saying it does)

... don't get me started on Bush.

Last edited by Ninja Dodo; 11-19-2003 at 05:32 AM.
Ninja Dodo is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 08:20 AM   #12
jaf
big, hairy and blue
 
jaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Titan
Is it doltish to put out a statement that, according to polling, 60% of Americans believe is the case?

Or is it that you believe it is doltish that Bush really believes what he is saying?

If the latter, then you are of course saying that 60% of Americans are doltish. While you would get agreement from the majority at this site on that point, all polling in Canada and Europe indicates a belief in his doltishness, but a respect for the American people. That sorta' flies in the face of intellectual honesty to say the least.
It is doltish not to respect the "minority".
__________________
Âż?
jaf is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 08:36 AM   #13
:P ^^^ at tamz
 
twifkak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Football Town, USA
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via ICQ to twifkak Send a message via AIM to twifkak Send a message via MSN to twifkak Send a message via Yahoo to twifkak
Default

It should be noted that the court case ruling doesn't mandate the state to marry the two "plaintiffs" (or whatever they're called). All it's doing is giving the state's legislative branch (that's funny-langue for "Congress") 180 days (I think that's the term, anywho) to come up with a semantic loophole to the legal marriage/religious marriage thing (most likely, the same "civil unions" that Vermont allows), or to amend the state's consitution, so that the court ruling becomes irrelevant. The state's governor is really opposed to letting two people of the same gender marry (and has the congress on his side, IIRC), so the latter is a lot more likely than it'd usually be (in the US, consitutional amendments are ass-harder to pass than laws).

And don't kindle the flame.
__________________
In the next AG crash ___| A temporary board ____| I am born to spam
In the "Get New" list __| Scrolling up and down | I am born to spam

through a broadband ISP | i am back to steal your bandwidth

--Spammo-head, "Windbag"
twifkak is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 09:50 AM   #14
Puts the 'e' in Mark
 
Marek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swordmaster
Yes, I know the meaning of the word. My two lines are to be read as one comment.
Marek is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 10:22 AM   #15
Liver of Life
 
Zygomaticus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,317
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninja Dodo
A lot of people seem to think it says so in the bible anyway... (note: I'm not saying it does)

... don't get me started on Bush.
Even then, those people seem to ignore that this is a country where there's supposed to be separation of "church and state."

Why must one religion dictate the way the country lives?
Zygomaticus is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 10:29 AM   #16
:P ^^^ at tamz
 
twifkak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Football Town, USA
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via ICQ to twifkak Send a message via AIM to twifkak Send a message via MSN to twifkak Send a message via Yahoo to twifkak
Default

One of the points brought up by a friend of mine is that if it was/were a full-on marriage, instead of a civil marriage, then if, say, a church denied you the right to wed under their services solely based on your genders, you would be able to sue (or, hypothetically, be able to win a lawsuit). I'm not an expert, so I can't confirm or deny that statement.
__________________
In the next AG crash ___| A temporary board ____| I am born to spam
In the "Get New" list __| Scrolling up and down | I am born to spam

through a broadband ISP | i am back to steal your bandwidth

--Spammo-head, "Windbag"
twifkak is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 10:45 AM   #17
AKA Morte
 
Garyos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sigil
Posts: 1,101
Send a message via MSN to Garyos
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by twifkak
One of the points brought up by a friend of mine is that if it was/were a full-on marriage, instead of a civil marriage, then if, say, a church denied you the right to wed under their services solely based on your genders, you would be able to sue (or, hypothetically, be able to win a lawsuit). I'm not an expert, so I can't confirm or deny that statement.
Wouldn't the church be given a fine anyway?
Garyos is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 11:00 AM   #18
:P ^^^ at tamz
 
twifkak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Football Town, USA
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via ICQ to twifkak Send a message via AIM to twifkak Send a message via MSN to twifkak Send a message via Yahoo to twifkak
Default

Why?
__________________
In the next AG crash ___| A temporary board ____| I am born to spam
In the "Get New" list __| Scrolling up and down | I am born to spam

through a broadband ISP | i am back to steal your bandwidth

--Spammo-head, "Windbag"
twifkak is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 11:07 AM   #19
AKA Morte
 
Garyos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sigil
Posts: 1,101
Send a message via MSN to Garyos
Default

Because it would be against the law?
Garyos is offline  
Old 11-19-2003, 12:59 PM   #20
:P ^^^ at tamz
 
twifkak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Football Town, USA
Posts: 1,354
Send a message via ICQ to twifkak Send a message via AIM to twifkak Send a message via MSN to twifkak Send a message via Yahoo to twifkak
Default

What law?
__________________
In the next AG crash ___| A temporary board ____| I am born to spam
In the "Get New" list __| Scrolling up and down | I am born to spam

through a broadband ISP | i am back to steal your bandwidth

--Spammo-head, "Windbag"
twifkak is offline  
 



Thread Tools

 


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.