Bitcoin Forum
May 05, 2024, 07:15:45 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Same sex marriage & cultural jousting at the Supreme Court.  (Read 683 times)
qikager
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 19
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 02:35:46 PM
 #21

The country can overrule the Court - via amendment of the Constitution, but with the change in attitude in this country, the possibility of that happening is slim to none.

Agreed, simply because most people in younger generations, relative to boomers, don't buy it that allowing same-sex marriage somehow is a threat to their own relationships or anything at all. They don't buy it that the weather changes for the worse when gay marriage is allowed, for example, but plenty of old fools accept that as true fact. So, some Republicans are still courting those votes, but the steady movement of time is reducing the water in that well.

The same isn't true about a Federal constitutional amendment to get big money out of politics. That is indeed seen as a threat, a very serious threat, to our democratic republic. It's interesting that Hillary has picked up on this, whether one trusts her or not to carry through. Looks to me that the Democrats will be tapping a much richer source of votes than what the Republicans are fishing for.

The end results will be that marriage stays, and talking money goes back to being the actual harmful thing it once was: political bribery.

There of course will be fringes vying for attention, similar to the KKK in S. Carolina and its love affair with the Stars and Bars or Biblical theme parks. Just stuff we have to put up with but not having much meaning otherwise. Right now certain counties in certain states are refusing to grant marriage licenses, which probably won't last very long. This isn't as emotionally charged as civil rights were, and not all religious people believe that granting marriage licenses is against their religions. Most, I imagine, can easily separate what one does for a living from what one does to be pious. For example, a Jewish person might have a job that produces non-kosher food. That's perfectly okay as long as that person continues to consume kosher food. What other people decide to consume is irrelevant from a personal and spiritual standpoint.

That's probably the biggest and most obvious bad thinking among those who oppose same-sex marriage. Why so concerned about what others decide to do? The rationalizations come out, but it all leads to wanting to impose personal beliefs upon others who have not decided to embrace those beliefs, an obvious power play.
1714936545
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714936545

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714936545
Reply with quote  #2

1714936545
Report to moderator
The Bitcoin network protocol was designed to be extremely flexible. It can be used to create timed transactions, escrow transactions, multi-signature transactions, etc. The current features of the client only hint at what will be possible in the future.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
xemra
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 02:40:25 PM
 #22

Would a rational person ever choose marry a person they didn't prefer? One could argue the "business" relationship or marriage of convenience, but these are more the exception than the rule.

Would those still not be marriages of preference? Preference can, and often does, involve a whole lot more than mere sexual attraction. So, fwiw, I see no reason for this distinction.
Daewoo
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 02:41:37 PM
 #23

Would a rational person ever choose marry a person they didn't prefer? One could argue the "business" relationship or marriage of convenience, but these are more the exception than the rule.

Would those still not be marriages of preference? Preference can, and often does, involve a whole lot more than mere sexual attraction. So, fwiw, I see no reason for this distinction.

Okay. Then that just removes that distinction. The question remains: would a rational person her choose to marry a person they didn't prefer?
xemra
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 18
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 06, 2015, 02:51:24 PM
 #24

Would a rational person ever choose marry a person they didn't prefer? One could argue the "business" relationship or marriage of convenience, but these are more the exception than the rule.

Would those still not be marriages of preference? Preference can, and often does, involve a whole lot more than mere sexual attraction. So, fwiw, I see no reason for this distinction.

Okay. Then that just removes that distinction. The question remains: would a rational person her choose to marry a person they didn't prefer?

Yes, that is all it does, and I would think the answer to your question, here in the United States (ie, where marriages aren't arranged), the answer would be 'no'.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!