Poll: Should Same-Sex Marriages be Legalized Nationally?

Page 3 of 79 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 1181

Thread: For or Against Gay Marriage

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3,474
    Quote Originally Posted by emclean
    Where is marriage in the bill of rights? What is not mentioned in the bill of rights is for the states to decide. The feds have over stepped there powers laid out by the founding fathers. The feds were to provide for the common defense, work on issues with foreign governments, and regulate interstate issues. All other issues were to be decided by the states.

    Marriage is not in the bill of rights (yet). What is in the bill of rights is the full faith and credit clause which requires states to recognize each other's laws. So..If one state marry's someone, other states are required by the clause to recognize them.
    ---------------------------------------------------
    "It is never freedom of religion and freedom of speech when you use your religion as a guise to demean other people."
    ---------------------------------------------------

    I have joined the world of blogging...at
    www.joebrummer.com

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,628
    thank you Joe.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,109
    i am not familar with the full faith and credit clause which requires states to recognize each other's laws, can you direct me as to where it is in the bill of rights, so i can educate myself?

    also is there a limit as to whitch laws are to be recinised? would pot be liegal in navada if i had a CA Rx? what about consealed carry of a hand gun? i know of huge varences of what states will allow under there laws, ans that if it is legal in Indiana, i can and will be busted for it over in Ill.
    I ONLY APPOLIGE FOR MY SPELLING!

    federal code defining the militia, look it up for your self.
    Title 10, Subtitle A, Part I, chapter 13, Sec. 311.

    “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” — Theodore Roosevelt.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,628
    Article IV. - The States
    Section 1 - Each State to Honor all others

    Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

    Section 2 - State citizens, Extradition

    The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

    A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

    (No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.) (This clause in parentheses is superseded by Amendment XIII.)

    Section 3 - New States

    New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

    The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

    Section 4 - Republican government

    The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

    Vermont's legislation and the licensing of civil unions are "public acts" reflected in official records. A literal reading of the
    Full Faith and Credit Clause seems to require its application to them, but the law is otherwise in states having laws or policies
    opposing same-sex marriages.

    For example: "[The Full Faith and Credit clause does not] compel a state to substitute the statutes of other states for its
    own statutes dealing with a subject matter concerning which it is competent to legislate," under Pacific Employers v.
    Industrial Accident Comm., 306 U.S. 493, 501 (1939).

    "Judicial proceedings," however, cannot be so easily excepted from the application of the clause. While no such
    proceedings have validated a same-sex marriage or its first cousin, a civil union, they must be anticipated. Litigation in
    Vermont requiring validation of a civil union, for example, dissolution proceedings (available only if the union is recognized), is
    bound to arise. When it does, the proceedings will have to be recognized by other states.

    It is very unlikely that the U.S. Supreme Court, once it has the issue to decide, will deny application of the Full Faith and
    Credit Clause to same-sex marriages. It reads the clause broadly, saying its purpose is "to alter the status of the several states
    as independent foreign sovereignties, each free to ignore obligations created under the laws or by the judicial proceedings of
    the others, and to make them integral parts of a single nation. (Williams v. North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287 (1942).

    Even if the Court refuses to apply the Full Faith and Credit Clause to same-sex marriages, it cannot avoid the application of
    the Constitution's equal protection and due process clauses to them. ("[No State shall] deprive any person of life, liberty, or
    property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.")
    http://www.geocities.com/njcivilunion/full.htm

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,109
    thank you for the information.

    weather or not the full faith and credit clause will apply has yet to be tested in court, and it will most likley take the suprean court to decide if gay marrage is protected by this clause. but there is also the posability of congress steping in and set a general law of what marrage is.
    I ONLY APPOLIGE FOR MY SPELLING!

    federal code defining the militia, look it up for your self.
    Title 10, Subtitle A, Part I, chapter 13, Sec. 311.

    “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” — Theodore Roosevelt.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,628
    I'm not sure how it won't apply. Marriages are public acts bestowed with all the state rights. The amendent states they must recognize each other's public acts.

    I SUPPOSE congress could rule aganist gay public acts, but that would definitely be a form of discrimnation.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,109
    I know sheriffs are not automatically allowed to carry a concealed firearm, I would think a public election of a law enforcement officer would also be a public act.

    Would all referendums be public acts too?
    I ONLY APPOLIGE FOR MY SPELLING!

    federal code defining the militia, look it up for your self.
    Title 10, Subtitle A, Part I, chapter 13, Sec. 311.

    “To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.” — Theodore Roosevelt.

  8. #38
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by emclean
    thank you for the information.

    weather or not the full faith and credit clause will apply has yet to be tested in court, and it will most likley take the suprean court to decide if gay marrage is protected by this clause. but there is also the posability of congress steping in and set a general law of what marrage is.
    I find it ironic that "state's rights advocates" want to use Federal laws to force compliance. Prostitution is legal in Nevada, but a prostitute can't make a legal living as a prostitute in Ohio. Isn't that a full faith and credit clause miscarriage of justice, too? It's legal to drive in Michigan at 16, but don't drive in NY at 16.
    Full faith and credit not applying in that instance?
    the sad fact is that our laws mean whatever those empowered to make and enforce them says it means.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3,474
    Maybe this will make light of it. It is not about what is legal in one state being legal in another because it is legal in the first one.....(wow, that was a mouthful)

    It is about judges and how they rule things are or are not recognized. For instance, if one states court ruled on a case based on that states laws, They couldn't go to another state and get a different ruling. SO, If gay marriage is legal in one state and you went to anther state to get a divorce, they would need to grant it based on the clause.



    see below for a better explaination that I gave...
    http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f073.htm

    FULL FAITH AND CREDIT - A legal principle requiring judges to recognize and enforce valid decrees and judgments issued by courts in other states. Thus, a Wisconsin judgment for back alimony can be enforced in Idaho, if the recipient takes the steps necessary to convert it to an Idaho judgment.

    In the past, states often did not afford full faith and credit to custody decisions of courts in other states, preferring instead to decide the issues on the evidence before them. This often led to contradictory custody orders and sometimes children were kidnapped and thrown back and forth. Now, however, the Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act require states to give full faith and credit to custody decisions rendered in other states.

    FULL FAITH AND CREDIT ACT - 28 U.S.C. s.1738, requires that federal courts 'give a state-court judgment the same preclusive effect as would be given that judgment under the law of the State in which the judgment was rendered.' Migra v. Warren City School Dist. Bd. of Educ., 465 U.S. 75, 81 ('84).



    or on a sader note:

    In 1996, President William Jefferson Clinton initialed the Defense of Marriage Act. For purposes of federal law, marriage is defined exclusively as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife." The act also purports to lift any obligation of states under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution to recognize same-sex marriages that might be sanctioned in sister jurisdictions.

    At present, 37 states expressly withhold the sanctity of marriage from homosexual couples. The remainder accomplishes the same by implication. Under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Sun Oil Company vs. Wortman (1988), and Pacific Employers Ins. Co. vs. Industrial Accident Commission (1939), no state would be compelled to recognize same-sex marriages authorized by a sister state. The high court explained that the clause does not compel "a state to substitute the statutes of other states for its own statutes dealing with a subject matter concerning which it is competent to legislate." And the court declared in Penoyer vs. Neff (1878): "The state... has an absolute right to prescribe the conditions upon which the marriage relation between its own citizens shall be created, and the causes for which it may be dissolved."

    http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Sect...entDisplay.cfm
    ---------------------------------------------------
    "It is never freedom of religion and freedom of speech when you use your religion as a guise to demean other people."
    ---------------------------------------------------

    I have joined the world of blogging...at
    www.joebrummer.com

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,628
    I find it ironic that "state's rights advocates" want to use Federal laws to force compliance. Watch what you say, it might just come back to bite you.

    Prostitution is legal in Nevada, but a prostitute can't make a legal living as a prostitute in Ohio.
    Last time I checked, prostiution wasn't a Acts, Records, or judicial Proceeding.

    Isn't that a full faith and credit clause miscarriage of justice, too?
    No.

    It's legal to drive in Michigan at 16, but don't drive in NY at 16.
    A legal issued lisecnece from Michigan will allow a driver of 16 years of age to drive in NY. A NY resident cannot earn a lisecene at age 16 in NY.

    Full faith and credit not applying in that instance?
    It is.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    northern Ky.
    Posts
    2,211
    "requires states to recognize each others laws" - Here's a good one in that regard. My commercial truck's licence plate has the number 73,280 on it. That's the weight Ky allows me to haul, and charges me handily for the privilidge. Yet if I'm in Ohio, and weigh over 56,000 lbs., I get a nice ticket - Ohio police don't care what the Ky. licence says. There's no noticable difference between Ky. and Oh. in truck accidents, but Ohio doesn't care - it's been that way for years.

    Gay marriage advocates hope to start in one or two states, then bully their way all across the country. It's going to take longer than they think. The people of many states aren't going to allow it.

    Yes yes Duo Maxwell, I realize that's majority opression. Majority opression keeps ugly girls from getting positions as news anchors too. Get used to it.
    Why is it that our children can't read a Bible in school, but they can in prison?

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,628
    but Ohio doesn't care - it's been that way for years.
    Then you should take that up with the appropriate authorities, not with me. I don't control the legal hauling weight rules.

    Gay marriage advocates hope to start in one or two states, then bully their way all across the country. It's going to take longer than they think. The people of many states aren't going to allow it.
    You mean the same way interracial marraiges fought their way across the country? So you DO admit it will happen. heheheh

    Yes yes Duo Maxwell, I realize that's majority opression. Majority opression keeps ugly girls from getting positions as news anchors too. Get used to it.
    Majority oppression is also responsbile for the blood of millions. Majority oppression is responsible for denying minorities rights in the past. Majority oppression is responsible for years of slavery. Majority oppression is responsible (party in theory) for the civil war. Majority oppression is responsible for illegal internment of millions of Japanese. Majority oppression is not a viable, nor a just reason for denying rights, unless you wish to repeat the atroicites of the past and be bathed in the blood of innocents.

  13. #43
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by joebrummer
    Maybe this will make light of it. It is not about what is legal in one state being legal in another because it is legal in the first one.....(wow, that was a mouthful)

    It is about judges and how they rule things are or are not recognized. For instance, if one states court ruled on a case based on that states laws, They couldn't go to another state and get a different ruling. SO, If gay marriage is legal in one state and you went to anther state to get a divorce, they would need to grant it based on the clause.

    see below for a better explaination that I gave...
    http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f073.htm
    Thanks for the explanation.
    or on a sader note:

    In 1996, President William Jefferson Clinton initialed the Defense of Marriage Act. For purposes of federal law, marriage is defined exclusively as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife." The act also purports to lift any obligation of states under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution to recognize same-sex marriages that might be sanctioned in sister jurisdictions.

    At present, 37 states expressly withhold the sanctity of marriage from homosexual couples. The remainder accomplishes the same by implication. Under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Sun Oil Company vs. Wortman (1988), and Pacific Employers Ins. Co. vs. Industrial Accident Commission (1939), no state would be compelled to recognize same-sex marriages authorized by a sister state. The high court explained that the clause does not compel "a state to substitute the statutes of other states for its own statutes dealing with a subject matter concerning which it is competent to legislate." And the court declared in Penoyer vs. Neff (1878): "The state... has an absolute right to prescribe the conditions upon which the marriage relation between its own citizens shall be created, and the causes for which it may be dissolved."

    http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Sect...entDisplay.cfm
    I guess it depends on which side of the issue you're on, but I'd say that I'm impressed that Clinton actually did something right.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Calgary AB Canada
    Posts
    2,592
    Quote Originally Posted by JPSartre12
    , but I'd say that I'm impressed that Clinton actually did something right.


    I'm bookmarking this thread.

    Waxy

  15. #45
    JPSartre12 Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Duo_Maxwell
    ...Last time I checked, prostiution wasn't a Acts, Records, or judicial Proceeding.
    It does require a state license to operate a brothel.
    A legal issued lisecnece from Michigan will allow a driver of 16 years of age to drive in NY. A NY resident cannot earn a lisecene at age 16 in NY.
    But can a 16 year old licensed driver in Michigan move to NY and get his NY license at 16?

Posting Permissions

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