The Oregon Court of Appeals has formally asked the state’s highest court to decide whether Republican state senators who carried out a record-setting GOP walkout this year can run for
It’s not an additional right because before 2015 LGBT+ people were denied rights straight people have.
You will be surprised to learn legally being able to decide who your next of kin is and the ability to have the person you chose male life decisions is an important right that is ONLY gained through marriage.
It isn’t an additional right when a group gets access to rights that another group already has that they were previously denied due to bigotry.
Denying gay people the right to marry means that straight people enjoy legal rights that gay people do not. That’s straight people having extra rights.
Supporting the GOP supports unequal rights for Americans and that’s ignoring the overt issues of supporting fascists.
I feel that individuals fail to understand logic and or reason. Case in point, imagine if the 2nd Amendment only allowed the right to bear arms meant only gay burly men could possess firearms. Why so many straight white men have guns?
At one point, property ownership was defined as a white male possessing something, and voting was defined as something only male citizens could do. Do you also feel neither of those were Equal Rights issues?
Just because something was defined hundreds of years ago doesn’t mean it should stay that way forever, and it shouldn’t
So just because something was “defined” that means it should never change? Voting used to be defined as only white men voting. By your logic, we shouldn’t have changed that. Same for women having their own bank account or credit cards, everyone wearing seatbelts, smoking areas, etc.
But yes, the reason why marriage is unequal with gays is because of the benefits that come with being married. There’s no other way for gay couples to have those benefits unless they’re legally married. You might not be homophobic, but you’re absolutely wrong
This is doublethink. I’ve typed out several replies so far and deleted each one because I don’t think there’s anything that anyone can say to help you realize your logical fallacy. You said yourself that you won’t change your opinion, which means you’ve shut your mind down and are willing to reject any information in order to maintain a position. That’s no way to go through life, but it’s your life to live. Hopefully some day it becomes clear to you.
Was the emancipation proclamation also an addition of rights since black people were up until then, slaves? Do black people have additional rights in your mind by having the same freedom as other races, since they didn’t have equal rights to begin with?
Not sure you get what the emancipation. Proclamation was.
Since it only freed the slaves in the south. It very much was an additional right since the northern slaves were still slaves. The two groups were not equal under the law.
Yikes your thinking is so childish. Group A gets 10$ every week while group B always gets 5$. By your logic, once group B gets 10$ they now have “additional rights” by getting 5 “extra” dollars
This is your response to everything. “Well, they were slaves before but now that they’re free that basically means they now have additional rights”
That’s not a personal attack. It’s an actual question as if you think the only source of rights is in the constitution then you are very poorly educated.
To be clear part of your confusion seems to be what words like “extra”, “equal” and “additional” mean so suggestions that you aren’t well informed are not coming from nowhere.
I am not confused; the current court agrees with me. I get you are arguing from ignorance, but leave me out of your confusion. Thomas would like to review all the cases, and he thinks they are flawed. I agree. Most of these need to be overturned.
Stomping your foot and throwing insults is your way of trying to communicate, but it’s tiresome to adults. Go pout somewhere else.
I understand the law well and agree with the decisions’ fundamental issues. Now I don’t disagree with the outcomes but we don’t decide the outcome and then try to justify it. You let the facts lead you to the outcome.
Up until recently marriage was defined as a man and woman. As such it’s an additional right.
You’re not going to change my opinion on the topic. While I’m fine with gay marriage. It’s not an equal right issue as it’s an additional right.
Deny gay marriage is not giving straight couples more rights. It’s giving them the right to marriage which was defined as a man and a woman.
It’s not an additional right because before 2015 LGBT+ people were denied rights straight people have.
You will be surprised to learn legally being able to decide who your next of kin is and the ability to have the person you chose male life decisions is an important right that is ONLY gained through marriage.
It isn’t an additional right when a group gets access to rights that another group already has that they were previously denied due to bigotry.
Denying gay people the right to marry means that straight people enjoy legal rights that gay people do not. That’s straight people having extra rights.
Supporting the GOP supports unequal rights for Americans and that’s ignoring the overt issues of supporting fascists.
I feel that individuals fail to understand logic and or reason. Case in point, imagine if the 2nd Amendment only allowed the right to bear arms meant only gay burly men could possess firearms. Why so many straight white men have guns?
At one point, property ownership was defined as a white male possessing something, and voting was defined as something only male citizens could do. Do you also feel neither of those were Equal Rights issues?
Just because something was defined hundreds of years ago doesn’t mean it should stay that way forever, and it shouldn’t
So just because something was “defined” that means it should never change? Voting used to be defined as only white men voting. By your logic, we shouldn’t have changed that. Same for women having their own bank account or credit cards, everyone wearing seatbelts, smoking areas, etc.
But yes, the reason why marriage is unequal with gays is because of the benefits that come with being married. There’s no other way for gay couples to have those benefits unless they’re legally married. You might not be homophobic, but you’re absolutely wrong
And what does any of that have to do with what I said? Nothing. Zero. Zilch.
I clearly explained how it should have been changed. The courts have said the same thing.
This is doublethink. I’ve typed out several replies so far and deleted each one because I don’t think there’s anything that anyone can say to help you realize your logical fallacy. You said yourself that you won’t change your opinion, which means you’ve shut your mind down and are willing to reject any information in order to maintain a position. That’s no way to go through life, but it’s your life to live. Hopefully some day it becomes clear to you.
It is clear to me. It was an addition of rights and I’m fine with that.
Was the emancipation proclamation also an addition of rights since black people were up until then, slaves? Do black people have additional rights in your mind by having the same freedom as other races, since they didn’t have equal rights to begin with?
Not sure you get what the emancipation. Proclamation was.
Since it only freed the slaves in the south. It very much was an additional right since the northern slaves were still slaves. The two groups were not equal under the law.
Yikes your thinking is so childish. Group A gets 10$ every week while group B always gets 5$. By your logic, once group B gets 10$ they now have “additional rights” by getting 5 “extra” dollars
This is your response to everything. “Well, they were slaves before but now that they’re free that basically means they now have additional rights”
No my dude lol. This isn’t complicated
That makes zero sense and you should obviously missed the point.
It’s an addition if rights THAT OTHER PEOPLE ALREADY HAD THIS GIVING LGBT PEOPLE THESE SAME RIGHTS MADE THEM EQUAL
I disagree.
Where in the constitution does it mention marriage? It doesn’t. It was an overreaching court that made some weird claim it’s a 14th amendment right.
The 10th amendment clearly states rights not defined in the constitution are the rights of the states.
As such the states or congress should have voted on the issue. It’s why roe was overturned as well. Congress should have created a law for abortion.
Your lack of understanding of the law isn’t an issue of my viewpoints. I support our constitution and I don’t support the level system making laws.
Congress need to do their job.
Are you so poorly educated that you think the constitution is the only source of rights?
I don’t think you have an understanding of the law at all based on the ignorance you display here
Thanks for the personal attack. as it shows you don’t grasp what I said at all.
That’s not a personal attack. It’s an actual question as if you think the only source of rights is in the constitution then you are very poorly educated.
To be clear part of your confusion seems to be what words like “extra”, “equal” and “additional” mean so suggestions that you aren’t well informed are not coming from nowhere.
I am not confused; the current court agrees with me. I get you are arguing from ignorance, but leave me out of your confusion. Thomas would like to review all the cases, and he thinks they are flawed. I agree. Most of these need to be overturned.
Stomping your foot and throwing insults is your way of trying to communicate, but it’s tiresome to adults. Go pout somewhere else.
I understand the law well and agree with the decisions’ fundamental issues. Now I don’t disagree with the outcomes but we don’t decide the outcome and then try to justify it. You let the facts lead you to the outcome.
https://nypost.com/2022/06/24/court-should-reconsider-gay-marriage-birth-control-clarence-thomas/
deleted by creator