Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 58 of 58
  1. #51  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailey View Post
    Nope I am being what they call right. You can marry the same people i can, you just want to change the rules to marry members of your own sex.
    I can also be legally and church married (to a person of the same sex) in some states and countries, just as married as any other service member.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #52  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,838
    So, I have a t-shirt with the Dixie Flag on it that I got in the Gettysburg tourist shop, and the words "Gettysburg" underneath. I find civil war history fascinating, and especially the evolution of warfare that came with technology innovations in rifling and the use of rail-roads. I specifically visited Gettysburg to stand on the high water mark at Pickett's Charge. I can't imagine what it was like to be coming up that hill into the union defences. Really interesting stuff. So, I'm a bit of an enthusiast.

    Does wearing a t-shirt from the Gettysburg tourist shop imply that someone is a racist? What about getting their picture taken in the t-shirt?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #53  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by m00 View Post
    So, I have a t-shirt with the Dixie Flag on it that I got in the Gettysburg tourist shop, and the words "Gettysburg" underneath. I find civil war history fascinating, and especially the evolution of warfare that came with technology innovations in rifling and the use of rail-roads. I specifically visited Gettysburg to stand on the high water mark at Pickett's Charge. I can't imagine what it was like to be coming up that hill into the union defences. Really interesting stuff. So, I'm a bit of an enthusiast.

    Does wearing a t-shirt from the Gettysburg tourist shop imply that someone is a racist? What about getting their picture taken in the t-shirt?
    Exactly. Moreover, we really only care if some people are offended and others less so. I personally am offended by the Battle Hymn Of The Republic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #54  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Supporting equal rights for gay people is not pissing on the military. Feel free to consult the life of Uriah Levy and Hyman Rickover for perspective.
    Demanding the complete overthrow of the military culture in order to accommodate a lifestyle that provides no benefits to the armed services is pissing on that culture.

    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Just in case you are being a semantics ninny, or just plain ignorant, Gay military personnel are not treated equally under military policy even though DADT has ended. Their legally married spouses are not recognized for the purpose of family benefits. But they will be.
    Gay troops do not have legal spouses of the same gender according to federal law. If you want to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, then take it up with the congress.

    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    I can also be legally and church married (to a person of the same sex) in some states and countries, just as married as any other service member.
    Yes, but you aren't as married as any other service member under federal law. As I said above, take it up with congress.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #55  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Demanding the complete overthrow of the military culture i......
    Drama Queen.


    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    If you want to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, then take it up with the congress. .

    Don't have to, it's unconstitutional and will be undone. Scalia said so.


    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    As I said above, take it up with congress.
    Don't have to, it's unconstitutional, Scalia said so.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #56  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Drama Queen.
    Look who's talking.

    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Don't have to, it's unconstitutional and will be undone. Scalia said so.

    Don't have to, it's unconstitutional, Scalia said so.
    Scalia said nothing of the sort, and you know it. What he said was that if the "logic" of the court's decision to overturn anti sodomy laws was applied to other case law, that it would justify gay marriage, but this was his argument against overturning the anti sodomy laws.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #57  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Scalia said nothing of the sort, and you know it. What he said was that if the "logic" of the court's decision to overturn anti sodomy laws was applied to other case law, that it would justify gay marriage, but this was his argument against overturning the anti sodomy laws.
    Scalia was just whining. He knows he lost, and he knows that he'll defer to precedent when the time comes. Oh, and something I just noticed is that part of his argument has been overcome by events:

    The Court views it as “discrimination” which it is the function of our judgments to deter. So imbued is the Court with the law profession’s anti-anti-homosexual culture, that it is seemingly unaware that the attitudes of that culture are not obviously “mainstream”; that in most States what the Court calls “discrimination” against those who engage in homosexual acts is perfectly legal; that proposals to ban such “discrimination” under Title VII have repeatedly been rejected by Congress, see Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 1994, S. 2238, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. (1994); Civil Rights Amendments, H. R. 5452, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. (1975); that in some cases such “discrimination” is mandated by federal statute, see 10 U.S.C. § 654(b)(1) (mandating discharge from the armed forces of any service member who engages in or intends to engage in homosexual acts); and that in some cases such “discrimination” is a constitutional right, see Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000).

    Let me be clear that I have nothing against homosexuals, promoting their agenda through normal democratic means. Social perceptions of sexual and other morality change over time, and every group has the right to persuade its fellow citizens that its view of such matters is the best. That homosexuals have achieved some success in that enterprise is attested to by the fact that Texas is one of the few remaining States that criminalize private, consensual homosexual acts. But persuading one’s fellow citizens is one thing, and imposing one’s views in absence of democratic majority will is something else.

    And there is where the good little Vatican steamship Scalia runs aground. Civil Rights are not a popularity contest.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #58  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    8,232
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    Scalia was just whining. He knows he lost, and he knows that he'll defer to precedent when the time comes. Oh, and something I just noticed is that part of his argument has been overcome by events:

    The Court views it as “discrimination” which it is the function of our judgments to deter. So imbued is the Court with the law profession’s anti-anti-homosexual culture, that it is seemingly unaware that the attitudes of that culture are not obviously “mainstream”; that in most States what the Court calls “discrimination” against those who engage in homosexual acts is perfectly legal; that proposals to ban such “discrimination” under Title VII have repeatedly been rejected by Congress, see Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 1994, S. 2238, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. (1994); Civil Rights Amendments, H. R. 5452, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. (1975); that in some cases such “discrimination” is mandated by federal statute, see 10 U.S.C. § 654(b)(1) (mandating discharge from the armed forces of any service member who engages in or intends to engage in homosexual acts); and that in some cases such “discrimination” is a constitutional right, see Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000).

    Let me be clear that I have nothing against homosexuals, promoting their agenda through normal democratic means. Social perceptions of sexual and other morality change over time, and every group has the right to persuade its fellow citizens that its view of such matters is the best. That homosexuals have achieved some success in that enterprise is attested to by the fact that Texas is one of the few remaining States that criminalize private, consensual homosexual acts. But persuading one’s fellow citizens is one thing, and imposing one’s views in absence of democratic majority will is something else.

    And there is where the good little Vatican steamship Scalia runs aground. Civil Rights are not a popularity contest.
    Somone needs to put their big girl panties on.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •