Victory - Same-Sex Power to Marry

[Mikee]

"Imagine a world..."

-Robert Bidinotto

[merjet]

How long will it be until those with new "marriage rights" be considered a privileged minority regarding obtaining contracts and loans from the federal government?

[Peter]

What was that boom? Was that a jet plane breaking the sound barrier? No it was Robert Bidinotto writing a polemic. He is really good and I rarely have any quibbles with him.

Robert wrote: Imagine a world in which education were entirely privatized -- in which schools were like grocery stores, auto dealerships, bookstores, or any other private companies. No parents would be forced to put their kids into a school system they didn't like, with teachers they didn't trust, with curricula they loathed -- or to pay taxes to support such private companies . . . . end quote

My quibble? Abusive private teachers and homeschooling parents who teach their students mush, and Schools for terrorism as abound in Pakistan. There must be a point where total freedom infringes upon individual rights but who is to decide? Reasoned courts. Sensible standards. A Constitutional Government.

[Peter]

Merlin the Magician wrote: How long will it be until those with new "marriage rights" be considered a privileged minority regarding obtaining contracts and loans from the federal government? End quote

Robert Bidinotto wrote: The "gay marriage" controversy is but the latest example of how social disruption has been manufactured -- not solved -- by governmental (political) involvement. The entire controversy stems from the fact that government has been involved in defining what a "marriage" is . . . Now, with this new Court decision, they will predictably try to use their new "marital rights" as a bludgeon against private individuals, businesses, and religious organizations that do not share their own elastic definition of "marriage." Rather than take this as an opportunity to celebrate live-and-let-live social arrangements, in which everyone can associate voluntarily as they choose, they will instead eagerly try to use the power of law to force and coerce any private, peaceful individuals who disagree with them to associate and deal with them -- to bake their wedding cakes, cater their weddings, provide venues for their ceremonies, even perform their ceremonies. Why? . . . Because the main thing that "liberals" are "wedded" to is not some definition of marriage, but to their zero-sum, tribalist, coercive, us-vs.-them worldview. No, they don't really want peace and love and harmony: That's just their cover story . . . They want power and control over others. End quote

I will hate to see that happen. I remember how Ayn Rand was vilified when she stated that a restaurant owner should be allowed TO NOT serve anyone they pleased. Rand Paul said the same thing a few years ago but then walked it back. I remember that it was discussed that if the Civil Rights Act is upheld then a store owner can refuse to sell to a customer because they dont like their shirt (say with a confederate flag on it) or their lack of shoes at a beach resort, or they dont like their looks but just dont say it is because of race, sex, they are wearing a hoodie, place of origin and accent, etc. In other words, arbitrary discrimination is still OK, Big Brother.

[william.scherk]

Give a hot-link when you quote something or someone, please, Peter (or should that be Pierre La Tailleur?). Another rant about "Them" and the the 'slippery slope' ... and not a word of empathy for ordinary gay couples ('Liberalism is sociopathy'). Well, maybe there was a word of empathy. From Bidinotto's blog, "How government created gay marriage."

If readers are looking for a full-bore denunciation of the SCOTUS decision, Bidinotto's angry denunciation seems like a wedding cake next to the effulgence of rage at SOLO, where proprietor Lindsay Perigo has dropped another turd, Beware the Rainbow Inquisition. Key words: swastika, career gays, severing sex from romance, closing bakeries, vicious fascist lesbians, ludicrous litany, Orwellian, PC Thought Nazis, didactic ECT, swastika, Homofascism, Hitlerian persecution, Muslim tyrannies ...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

... seems like a wedding cake next to the effulgence of rage at SOLO, where proprietor Lindsay Perigo ...

William,

The thing I like best about that gentleman is his irrelevance.

Michael

[Jonathan]

... seems like a wedding cake next to the effulgence of rage at SOLO, where proprietor Lindsay Perigo ...

William,

The thing I like best about that gentleman is his irrelevance.

Michael

The thing that I like best is his inability to learn from his irrelevance, due to his belief that his ever-deepening irrelevance is proof of his heroism.

J

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

The thing that I like best is his inability to learn from his irrelevance, due to his belief that his ever-deepening irrelevance is proof of his heroism.

[moralist]

So, Greg, if you superstitiously claim The Bible is the word of God...

I don't.

The Bible is words about God... and about man's moral accountability to God for his behavior.

Greg

[Brant Gaede]

"An actual vote of the people"--most of whom aren't Americans, Greg. Remember?

Many religious Americans don't vote. In that case they turned out in droves because it was a direct assault by the left on the thousands of years old moral standard of marriage. This isn't new, Brant. This isn't the first time sexual perversion became pervasive in a society. It is directly linked to the rise of the fastest growing religion in the world... secular leftism.

The last time the secular leftists had their way... things did not go well.

Greg

Thomas Sowell has come out against the SCOTUS marriage ruling on the grounds it's a states' rights matter as stated in the Constitution. I'm on the side of the ruling, however, but it's small potatoes compared to the two supporting rulings on Obamacare. Not small potatoes to gays, of course--the gays who wanted the sanctity of marriage formally recognized. I think marriage under the law is mixing up the state and religion and there should be no such thing. So when it's finally gotten rid of hundreds of years from now gays and straights will be equally effected. I come down on the side of equality under the law.

--Brant

[merjet]

I don't claim to know all the issues related to the "same-sex controversy." But there are some issues that haven't been touched on here.

I'm all for married same-sex couples having the same status as married hetero-sex couples regarding hospital visitation rights, power of attorney for health care or finances, divorce and inheritance. States have default rules (they do vary between states) to handle married hetero-sex couples that apply when the couple has not established something different written and duly executed. Even unmarried same-sex couples can arrange the powers/procedures they want, but that often costs money, like paying an attorney. The SCOTUS decision presumably makes the default rules for married hetero-sex couples apply to married same-sex couples.

Were the default rules prior to the SCOTUS decision unfair to same-sex couples compared to hetero-sex couples? Yes, but not nearly as much as it may seem. Especially for inheritance, such default rules are often not what married hetero-sex couples want applied in their case, especially if one or both have been married previously and have children from the prior marriage or other relatives of concern. So they also have to make special arrangements for what they want with its attendant cost. Even after the SCOTUS decision, ditto for a same-sex married couple who don't want the default rules applied in their situation.

[Guyau]

.

Ask the Kids

[moralist]

"An actual vote of the people"--most of whom aren't Americans, Greg. Remember?

Many religious Americans don't vote. In that case they turned out in droves because it was a direct assault by the left on the thousands of years old moral standard of marriage. This isn't new, Brant. This isn't the first time sexual perversion became pervasive in a society. It is directly linked to the rise of the fastest growing religion in the world... secular leftism.

The last time the secular leftists had their way... things did not go well.

Greg

Thomas Sowell has come out against the SCOTUS marriage ruling on the grounds it's a states' rights matter as stated in the Constitution.

I totally agree... and it was decided on a state level by the state's right of a proposition vote in California.

" So when it's finally gotten rid of hundreds of years from now gays and straights will be equally effected. I come down on the side of equality under the law."

They already had enjoyed equality under the law in many states through civil unions of which I am totally in favor.

But this was not enough... for secular leftists, their homosexual relationships HAD to be decreed to be "marriage" by their god, the government... and because they created liberal government in their own image... it naturally granted to them what they demanded.

And just to be clear, this has nothing to do with God or morality. This issue is solely an agreement between secular leftists and the liberal government they created in their own image.

It's the narcissism of creating your own mirror and then asking yourself:

"Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?"

You'll only ever get ONE answer!

Greg

[Peter]

Thanks to Stephen B, for this thread.

This is what could happen in a gay marriage thanks to the Supreme Court. Come on Kennedy and Roberts. Did you really think this thru? Bens Afflecks money from Batman and his other Oscar nominated roles may be in jeopardy. (Lovely Jennifer Garners) poker hand (held by lawyers) is a bit easier to play but more difficult for a macho man like Ben to accept and counter without appearing to be cheap or less than caring. So, I emote facetiously, Poor Jen; there are approximately ten Hollywood producers who want Jennifer for another movie role. And at last count, including Africa, Europe, and Asia there were 120, 000, 000 men who said they would give their right arm to be married to Jennifer Garner. Many of these men are wealthy. Euros, Rubles, Drachmas, gold, rubies, diamonds, dollars and a couple with pesos. Instead the divorce is going to a mutually agreed upon by an arbiter for the division of property and Ben will continue to live on the couples estate in an apartment. He will be a co-parent and his kids will never think he has abandoned them. What a waste. Why couldnt Ben Jen get along?

Peter

From the Hollywood Reporter:

What a marriage lasting very near 10 years either below or above might signify for a celebrity couple in California. By ending her marriage to Ben Affleck now, Jennifer Garner has gotten 10 years of wedlock. And that could be significant, say legal observers.

"A marriage of 10 years or more is deemed a lengthy marriage in California," says Scott Robinson at Liner LLP. "This creates some issues, chiefly with regard to spousal support, and is one of many factors the court must consider in determining whether there should be any spousal support and, if there is, the amount and duration."

The "10 year rule" is part of California's family code and could also mean that a judge will be looking after the Affleck-Garner split for years to come. For those looking for insight into celebrity divorces, a marriage falling just short of 10 years or barely making it past the mark provides a lot of room for speculation. An example: If a couple has a prenuptial agreement, spousal support (also called alimony) might be dictated by contract and give a judge less latitude toward ordering one spouse to make ongoing payments to another. And so, a marriage lasting very near the 10 year mark either below or above might be indicative of no prenup.

Burt Levitch, an attorney at Rosenfeld Meyer & Susman, says he's counseled well-heeled clients in troubled marriages to be mindful of the ticking clock. "If they're in year eight or nine and feeling vulnerable, go ahead and file for dissolution," he says. In fact, celebrity marriages that last exactly nine years instead of exactly 10 appear to be a more common phenomenon. Some examples of nine-year marriages include Tom Cruise-Nicole Kidman (three days short of 10), Will Arnett-Amy Poehler, Paula Patton-Robin Thicke, Sonny Bono-Cher, Mayim Bialik-Michael Stone, Christie Brinkley-Peter Cook, Nora Ephron-Dan Greenburg, Tom Hanks-Samantha Lewes, Brendan Fraser-Afton Smith and Kim Basinger-Alec Baldwin. Of course, there's no way to tell whether any of these marriages ended at nine because of legal advantage or whether it was merely a coincidence. The same goes for other marriages like Meg Ryan-Dennis Quaid, Hilary Swank-Chad Lowe or Gwyneth Paltrow-Chris Martin that ended at 10 years.

Levitch also says there's no income cap precluding spousal support. If Affleck and Garner had no prenup, and she waited for the right time to ask for a divorce so as to garner spousal support, the fact that she derives money from past roles on Alias and Dallas Buyers Club won't limit a claim of entitlement to the many millions that Affleck is getting for playing Batman and other roles.

"They both have ability to earn good living, but one of them obviously makes a lot more," says Levitch. "She is raising a lot of kids. That has become her focus, and so a court might say, 'This is a marriage of 10 years or more. The pattern in marriage was that the husband provided the bulk of resources.' So it's possible a judge will use this to establish spousal support on an ongoing basis." End quote

I have been married for a half a century. I have never cheated. My word is my bond. As an aside, I am making fun of my convictions but they are real and will not be violated. I am an honorable Klingon, and an honorable man. I really hope they can work it out.

[merjet]

Following up on #86, by "special arrangements" I meant such things as a will, trust, named beneficiaries (not your estate) for investment/retirement accounts, or prenuptial agreement. Without them, the state's rules and/or somebody on a government payroll will decide, not you.

[moralist]

I have been married for a half a century. I have never cheated. My word is my bond. As an aside, I am making fun of my convictions but they are real and will not be violated. I am an honorable Klingon, and an honorable man. I really hope they can work it out.

Those are beautiful words to read, Peter.

Greg

[Guyau]

.

Religion and Lunacy

(Marriage in Israel)

[anthony]

A young woman has died of injuries. A religious fanatic stabbed Shira Banki at a Jerusalem Gay Pride march.

(A child was also killed in the fire bombing of a Palestinian home. Israel is in large danger from within, by both the extreme Orthodox Right and the compromising Left. I think savage responses like these by maniacs are what its enemies forsaw, with their recent ramping up of de-stabilizing attacks and psychological pressure on the State).

[moralist]

A young woman has died of injuries. A religious fanatic stabbed Shira Banki at a Jerusalem Gay Pride march.

(A child was also killed in the fire bombing of a Palestinian home. Israel is in large danger from within, by both the extreme Orthodox Right and the compromising Left. I think savage responses like these by maniacs are what its enemies forsaw, with their recent ramping up of de-stabilizing attacks and psychological pressure on the State).

This is how the extreme right and radical left meet with shared values on the dark side of the closed circle of the political spectrum.

Their common value is the angry blame (unjust accusation) of others which is the cause of every evil act.

Greg

[anthony]

double

[anthony]

A young woman has died of injuries. A religious fanatic stabbed Shira Banki at a Jerusalem Gay Pride march.

(A child was also killed in the fire bombing of a Palestinian home. Israel is in large danger from within, by both the extreme Orthodox Right and the compromising Left. I think savage responses like these by maniacs are what its enemies forsaw, with their recent ramping up of de-stabilizing attacks and psychological pressure on the State).

This is how the extreme right and radical left meet with shared values on the dark side of the closed circle of the political spectrum.

Their common value is the angry blame (unjust accusation) of others which is the cause of every evil act.

Greg

Greg,

Left ~ right are only simplified political terms. Each is built on premises which don't differ much, one from the other. The device of a circle you posit begins at the same point for both. Whether religious or 'humanist', both 'sides' were and are attempts to answer basic questions to basic human fears: I am here (why?) - I am fundamentally alone (who or what can I connect to?)

Evidently, for 'connectivity', the one 'side' broadly answers "To God", the other "To all People". But both are constructs, invented by the imagination and wishful-thinking of men - with secular humanism little more than a later 're-construct' of religiosity, I think, merely swapping objects of veneration (The State...etc)

Which doesn't make either 'real' - except for the concrete forms that men have built around them.

Both have used and needed physical force to back them up. It's just that presently - in the West - secular humanists dominate.

Rather than one being the foe of the other, the two philosophies are closer related than most think. Their common intellectual opposition is objectivity/objectivism.

[moralist]

A young woman has died of injuries. A religious fanatic stabbed Shira Banki at a Jerusalem Gay Pride march.

(A child was also killed in the fire bombing of a Palestinian home. Israel is in large danger from within, by both the extreme Orthodox Right and the compromising Left. I think savage responses like these by maniacs are what its enemies forsaw, with their recent ramping up of de-stabilizing attacks and psychological pressure on the State).

This is how the extreme right and radical left meet with shared values on the dark side of the closed circle of the political spectrum.

Their common value is the angry blame (unjust accusation) of others which is the cause of every evil act.

Greg

Greg,

Left ~ right are only simplified political terms. Each is built on premises which don't differ much, one from the other.

This is where we each have a different view, Tony.

America was founded on Judeo/Christian values... which puts it on the right.

This is in direct contrast to European secular liberal socialism... which is a product of the left.

America is abandoning Judeo/Christian values for European secular liberal socialist values.

Greg

[Selene]

"Objectivism," rational egoism, is, essentially, a very lonely place.

A place free of peer pressure and state pressure to obey and conform.

The "left" "right" semantic paradigm that our public discourse attempts to force on any speaker does not work in "Objectivism."

We should endeavor to avoid using those terms in that context.

A...

[Brant Gaede]

And Europe, Greg, will have to embrace overt fascism to deal with Islam that came to Europe--and is still coming, from without and within. The intellectual class will be swept aside. The analogue is what the Nazis did to the communists after Hitler came to power. This time the communists--I mean the intellectuals--have no balls. Only the North Koreans are up to totalitarianism today--and the Jihadists.

--Brant

now's the time to tour Europe

[anthony]

"Objectivism," rational egoism, is, essentially, a very lonely place.

A...

So simple, so true. For all men and women.

"Alone", however, doesn't have to translate to "lonely".

Being alone awakens all the exciting possibilities. It carries the implication:

What are we each going to do about it?