Gay Marriage Legalized In France

[New Chalcedon]

Mmmh? Linky please? I'd like to read it.

I would, but TG's aren't linkable. Just shoot him a TG.

Thanks - I may at that.

[citation needed]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bp6grWsIJA

Thanks for the effort, but sadly I don't speak Turkish. Is there a transcript that I can run through a translate program, or perhaps you can tell me the key parts of what was said?

[Divair]

I don't give a shit what the Chief Justice said. I asked for what the constitution said on marriage. What some political puppet on SCOTUS said doesn't mean anything important to me.

Yes, clearly you know more about the Constitution than the Chief Justice.

[New Chalcedon]

>Governments can't multitask, at least not efficiently. It's been proven during the fiscal cliff in the U.S.

That wasn't the US government multitasking. That was half of the US government trying to stop the other half from doing anything at all.

>They do matter, and not sure if civil rights really apply here.

Loving v. Virginia and Lawrence v. Texas would like to have words with you. The first established the right to marry as a basic civil right, and Antonin Scalia noted in his dissent to the second that the only place the logic used by the majority could end was gay marriage.

>Their financial benefits comes out of my pocket.

Oh, really? At present, the financial benefits for you to marry, breed and raise kids come out of my pocket, yet you don't hear me caterwauling like a stuck hog about it - I just want to have a level playing field. That's called living in a society, rather than as a hermit.

Also, economics is not a zero-sum game.

>Oh yeah? Name some.

Go look at the GAO's list.

>Yes, there definitely should be a separation of Church and State. But if not God's way, most definitely Nature's way.

Tell that to the 500+ other species in which same-sex sexual activity has been observed under normal circumstances.

Also, half the time gay people are gay because they look at our society and ask themselves if their gay, and almost convince themselves they are.

Citation fucking needed. This is barely half a step short of the "Teh gheyz are recrooting!" argument spouted by the stone-the-gays crowd.

Compared to the past and all of human history, gays seldom appeared.

Only in some societies, in some parts of history.

I know its obvious that when they were persecuted they didn't come out publicly, thus no gays in society. But there were surely many less gays overall statistic-wise.

Got any evidence for that? Didn't think so.

Think about it: Compare a child growing up in a gay household and one in a normal household. Which one is more likely to turn out gay?

Are you aware of just how close your "argument" is to the idea that being gay is a choice? Being gay is not a choice - I speak as someone who grew up in a very conservative (and devout Catholic, and emphatically straight - to this day, I think I'm the only gay person in my entire extended family, out to second cousins!) household in a very conservative part of a conservative Western country (Perth, Western Australia - anyone familiar with WA society can vouch for its conservatism). I was picked on through school for being "effeminate", and tried desperately to convince myself that I was straight until I was well into my 20s in an effort to put an end to the bullying.

Don't you fucking tell me that I was "brought up gay", you raving bigot.

[Anachronous Rex]

The case itself is irrelevant, the Chief Justice proclaimed marriage a civil right.

I don't give a shit what the Chief Justice said. I asked for what the constitution said on marriage. What some political puppet on SCOTUS said doesn't mean anything important to me.

An odd contradiction, given that the constitution says that those "political puppets" on SCOTUS does mean something important.

[Britannic Realms]

The Tories are basically the left-wing of the Democrats whilst Labour have virtually no differences from the Tories apart from a few vocal, socialist people. Like Ken Livingstone.

That's not saying much, a huge chunk of Europe and Latin America consists of parties further left of the Democrats. Democrats are, after all, quite right wing.

The Tories are right-wing and Thatcherite (not as right-wing as the Democrats, though). No doubt about it. Labour claims to not be right-wing and Thatcher, but they are. Basically, the Conservative Party = the Labour Party.

[Divair]

That's not saying much, a huge chunk of Europe and Latin America consists of parties further left of the Democrats. Democrats are, after all, quite right wing.

The Tories are right-wing and Thatcherite. No doubt about it. Labour claims to not be right-wing and Thatcher, but they are. Basically, the Conservative Party = the Labour Party.

I wouldn't be surprised if that's true.

[Divair]

I don't give a shit what the Chief Justice said. I asked for what the constitution said on marriage. What some political puppet on SCOTUS said doesn't mean anything important to me.

An odd contradiction, given that the constitution says that those "political puppets" on SCOTUS does mean something important.

It's not like SCOTUS interprets the Constitution for us or anything.

owaitfuckshit



Can't wait till the two current cases are over so same sex marriage is legalized nationally and it's over.

[Kemalist]

Thanks for the effort, but sadly I don't speak Turkish. Is there a transcript that I can run through a translate program, or perhaps you can tell me the key parts of what was said?

He was asked his opinions on LGBT rights by a gay student and he says that they should be recognized, and he opposes discriminations against them.

[New Chalcedon]

Thanks for the effort, but sadly I don't speak Turkish. Is there a transcript that I can run through a translate program, or perhaps you can tell me the key parts of what was said?

He was asked his opinions on LGBT rights by a gay student and he says that they should be recognized, and he opposes discriminations against them.

Hmm. Hardly even close to "gay marriage", but it's certainly a very encouraging step by an avowed Islamic conservative. Very interesting indeed. Thank you for the info!

[Divair]

He was asked his opinions on LGBT rights by a gay student and he says that they should be recognized, and he opposes discriminations against them.

Tbh, that doesn't say much. Putin claims he doesn't discriminate against them either.

[Kemalist]

He was asked his opinions on LGBT rights by a gay student and he says that they should be recognized, and he opposes discriminations against them.

Tbh, that doesn't say much. Putin claims he doesn't discriminate against them either.

But he also says that LGBT rights should be recognized by law.

[Chimes]

The Tories are right-wing and Thatcherite. No doubt about it. Labour claims to not be right-wing and Thatcher, but they are. Basically, the Conservative Party = the Labour Party.

I wouldn't be surprised if that's true.

It's not quite true. Sure, Labour aren't really 'left wing', but there's still a number of differences between them - more so on issues like health care, as well the amount of social conservatism being considerably less for Labour. Then again, that's just my personal perspective.
In regards to the OP, Good on France, good to see progress being made.

[Divair]

Tbh, that doesn't say much. Putin claims he doesn't discriminate against them either.

But he also says that LGBT rights should be recognized by law.

We'll see if that extends to SSM.

[Transhuman Proteus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

That case was about race based marriages, not gender based.

Bolded the important part of the decision -

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man,[/b]" fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

That the trial was about race is largely irrelevant when the court finds marriage to be a basic civil right - that applies to more than just racial considerations.

[Ifreann]

Fuck you, France, fuck you. Like I've said to many of my friends and family: "I'm moving to Uganda if the US keeps going down into moral oblivion."

Please, go. It's best for everyone.

I don't know, how do the Ugandans feel about immigrants?

---

The case itself is irrelevant, the Chief Justice proclaimed marriage a civil right.

I don't give a shit what the Chief Justice said. I asked for what the constitution said on marriage. What some political puppet on SCOTUS said doesn't mean anything important to me.

The US Constitution created the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court found that marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man. The Constitution also mentions that it is not the be all and end all of rights. So no, I don't think you care what the Constitution says at all, except that you think it lends weight to your opposition to equality for same sex couples.

[Volnotova]

How?

Marriage is a pillar of society and by legalizing Gay Marriage, we are re-defining Marriage from "A man and a woman coming together in holy matrimony" to "Anyone and anything that is living coming together in a secularized state institution of marriage."

Go away you "True Christian™", the institution of marriage predates your false theology.

[Divair]

I don't know, how do the Ugandans feel about immigrants?

If they're as homophobic as they are, I'm sure they'd be happy to greet him.

[New Chalcedon]

Please, go. It's best for everyone.

I don't know, how do the Ugandans feel about immigrants?

Does it matter?

[Kemalist]

He was asked his opinions on LGBT rights by a gay student and he says that they should be recognized, and he opposes discriminations against them.

Hmm. Hardly even close to "gay marriage", but it's certainly a very encouraging step by an avowed Islamic conservative. Very interesting indeed. Thank you for the info!

Even if he does not support gay marriage, the opposition parties do, which makes it quite possible for it to be recognized in the near future.

[Divair]

Hmm. Hardly even close to "gay marriage", but it's certainly a very encouraging step by an avowed Islamic conservative. Very interesting indeed. Thank you for the info!

Even if he does not support gay marriage, the opposition parties do, which makes it quite possible for it to be recognized in the near future.

Isn't his party far, far ahead of the opposition in terms of seat count?

[Hurdegaryp]

The novelty is starting to wear off.

Well, yeah. Unless said change also happens in the US or in some random African country.

Only South Africa has marriage equality, I would be genuinely surprised if any other African nation would introduce it.

[Divair]

Well, yeah. Unless said change also happens in the US or in some random African country.

Only South Africa has marriage equality, I would be genuinely surprised if any other African nation would introduce it.

Well, eventually they will. It'd just be insanely strange if they did within the next decade or so. I'm still surprised SA did it, and I'm from SA.

[Kemalist]

Even if he does not support gay marriage, the opposition parties do, which makes it quite possible for it to be recognized in the near future.

Isn't his party far, far ahead of the opposition in terms of seat count?

Yes, but Erdogan will not become a candidate in the next elections and AKP can hardly make up a majority again without him.

[Divair]

Isn't his party far, far ahead of the opposition in terms of seat count?

Yes, but Erdogan will not become a candidate in the next elections and AKP can hardly make up a majority again without him.

I hope so.

[New Chalcedon]

Isn't his party far, far ahead of the opposition in terms of seat count?

Yes, but Erdogan will not become a candidate in the next elections and AKP can hardly make up a majority again without him.

Are they that centred around him? I knew he was very much in charge of the party, but I'd have thought that the AKP wasn't entirely reliant upon his considerable political skills.