News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

The Gay Legal Rulings Thread

Started by The Minsky Moment, February 04, 2013, 11:58:34 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

sbr

Quote from: garbon on May 12, 2014, 09:24:26 PM
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2014, 09:20:58 PM
My favorite one was 'what if my kids were watching, what would I tell them!?!'  Any parent who can't answer that question in 2.2 seconds should have their kids impounded.

That fun Louis CK bit. :)

I know who he is but I don't know any of his bits.

garbon

Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2014, 09:25:01 PM
Quote from: garbon on May 12, 2014, 09:24:26 PM
Quote from: sbr on May 12, 2014, 09:20:58 PM
My favorite one was 'what if my kids were watching, what would I tell them!?!'  Any parent who can't answer that question in 2.2 seconds should have their kids impounded.

That fun Louis CK bit. :)

I know who he is but I don't know any of his bits.

http://youtu.be/eb-JZSyhWSc?t=1m4s
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

garbon

Oregon struts in.

QuoteFederal Judge Strikes Down Oregon Same-Sex Marriage Ban, Weddings Can Start Immediately
State officials have said they will not appeal the ruling. Judge's order is effective immediately.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Admiral Yi

How is Teh Gay Community going to react when Sam gets cut?

garbon

Probably wouldn't be hard to fall back on the general "we don't care about sports" narrative.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

garbon

Penn too! :w00t:

Oh and Yi I guess we'll just switch to WNBA now that they are marketing to LGBT. :lol:
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Sheilbh

Fat lady waddling onto the stage :P
Let's bomb Russia!

sbr

I saw an article that said Pennsylvania is the 19th state where gays can marry.  Does that mean that the other 31 states have laws banning it that just haven't been overturned yet?

garbon

#158
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 21, 2014, 06:28:13 PM
Fat lady waddling onto the stage :P

We are not even at half the states as was just pointed out.

Though I think I'll still demonize the opposition like I do racists.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

garbon

Quote from: sbr on May 21, 2014, 06:30:11 PM
I saw an article that said Pennsylvania is the 19th state where gays can marry.  Does that mean that the other 31 states have laws banning it that just haven't been overturned yet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States

Map on that with status.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

The Minsky Moment

There are now 7 appeal petitions before the Supreme Court relating to gay marriage issues.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Jacob

Quote from: garbon on May 21, 2014, 06:37:10 PM
We are not even at half the states as was just pointed out.

Though I think I'll still demonize the opposition like I do racists.

Seems reasonable.

Syt

So with Indiana's "Freedom of Religion Restoration Act," I have couple of questions:

- If a business owner refuses service to someone (say, someone he believes is gay) because it would be an undue burden on his religious conscience, how does the burden of proof work? After all, many times you can't tell from someone browsing your store whether they're gay or not.
- How far can this law go? If you think adulterers are sinners, can you refuse service? If you're devout Hindu and come into contact with an "untouchable" caste? Or as devout Muslim, can you refuse service to women who are not dressed appropriately or wear no hijab?
- And what if you feel you've been wrongfully denied service?
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.
—Stephen Jay Gould

Proud owner of 42 Zoupa Points.

grumbler

Quote from: Syt on March 29, 2015, 12:13:51 PM
So with Indiana's "Freedom of Religion Restoration Act," I have couple of questions:

- If a business owner refuses service to someone (say, someone he believes is gay) because it would be an undue burden on his religious conscience, how does the burden of proof work? After all, many times you can't tell from someone browsing your store whether they're gay or not.
I don't believe that anyone has ever used FRRA to justify denial of service.

Quote- How far can this law go? If you think adulterers are sinners, can you refuse service? If you're devout Hindu and come into contact with an "untouchable" caste? Or as devout Muslim, can you refuse service to women who are not dressed appropriately or wear no hijab?
None of those have ever been successfully justified under any version of FRRA.

Quote- And what if you feel you've been wrongfully denied service?
FRRA doesn't change this at all.

And that's three questions, not "a couple."  :P

The Indiana version of the FRRA is the same as the federal version, which passed the HoR unanimously and the Senate 97-3.  It has been enacted in something like 20 states. It is hardly controversial in actual fact, and hasn't lead to denial of service on religious grounds.  I find the widespread belief that it is something new and controversial to be a powerful condemnation of the American media system.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Sophie Scholl

#164
I was under the impression that the Federal version applied only to governmental interactions, whereas the Indiana version is about private citizens/businesses.  The Federal version has also lost a lot of its original clout in a series of SCOTUS decisions.
"Everything that brought you here -- all the things that made you a prisoner of past sins -- they are gone. Forever and for good. So let the past go... and live."

"Somebody, after all, had to make a start. What we wrote and said is also believed by many others. They just don't dare express themselves as we did."