"I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."
Wow I bet they feel SO honoured.
Wow I bet they feel SO honoured.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Wow, is this 2009?
- Thread starter Dr. Cheese
- Start date
Judge is right... He is looking out for their best interest, it's just not practical to do this. They would have to have 2 bathrooms, 2 showers, 2 sinks... you get the point.
I know... it's almost comical. I understand = I agree.
One of my favorite quotes from George Clinton:
"Think...It ain't illegal yet !"
There is a difference between what is legal and what is right.
My understanding from what funkdamental was stating was that it is ok for homosexual marriages to not be allowed simply because it is not specifically written in a law. Where as this justice shouldn't be allowed to follow his judgement, because it is "legal" for interracial marriages. Is that correct?
This Justice of the Peace, was in fact well within his legal rights to deny the marriage(regardless of the fact that I think it was morally wrong) there is no law in effect that I have ever heard or read of that would in fact force him to marry the couple. If any of you are aware of one I would appreciate the info.
also Justice's of the Peace are historically elected positions, they are not employee's of the state( which some people were stating earlier in the thread)
My understanding from what funkdamental was stating was that it is ok for homosexual marriages to not be allowed simply because it is not specifically written in a law. Where as this justice shouldn't be allowed to follow his judgement, because it is "legal" for interracial marriages. Is that correct?
This Justice of the Peace, was in fact well within his legal rights to deny the marriage(regardless of the fact that I think it was morally wrong) there is no law in effect that I have ever heard or read of that would in fact force him to marry the couple. If any of you are aware of one I would appreciate the info.
also Justice's of the Peace are historically elected positions, they are not employee's of the state( which some people were stating earlier in the thread)
It's not the "fact's" that you bring to the table, its the way you say(write) things that make people feel as though the information you are presenting is your own opinion.
You really seem to be having difficulty distinguishing between an explanation and an endorsement. Simply stating how things are is not an endorsement. Is it? Did you try readiing what he wrote without thinking he's saying he's for it? Which is not what he's saying.
He's even telling you that and you still don't seem to want to acknowledge it. Here's how complicated this isn't... if I state the rationale behind the electoral college, does that mean I'm for it or against?
Go ahead and quote where he gave that OPINION. Maybe that'll clear this up.
It really is a TB staple.
If you go back to funk's original post that I quoted, in that post he quotes a post of cheese's. In addition to quoting Cheese he adds a +1. Now correct me if I'm wrong but that means that he agree's with Cheese's statement. At that point he adds to the statement by saying that this is only an issue because historically there have been laws to descrimate people by their skin color.
Then a few posts later he says:
"Interesting you should say this. Im not stating for or against it, but I dont recall it being legal in any other country either. The UK for instance."
So between all of these statments, through their phrasing and use of emoticons, I got this feeling:
My understanding from what funkdamental was stating was that it is ok for homosexual marriages to not be allowed simply because it is not specifically written in a law. Where as this justice shouldn't be allowed to follow his judgement, because it is "legal" for interracial marriages. Is that correct?
I'm sorry if I'm wrong, which I may be but even after reading the posts several times, i still get the same vibe from Funk's post's and choice of quotes.
Really, I just wan't to see equality for all people, and not just based on skin color. So i don't see why all of america's cultural inequalities on the system of marriage can't be discussed at the same time with out flaming.
Now if you exscuse me, I need to go practice
Then a few posts later he says:
"Interesting you should say this. Im not stating for or against it, but I dont recall it being legal in any other country either. The UK for instance."
So between all of these statments, through their phrasing and use of emoticons, I got this feeling:
My understanding from what funkdamental was stating was that it is ok for homosexual marriages to not be allowed simply because it is not specifically written in a law. Where as this justice shouldn't be allowed to follow his judgement, because it is "legal" for interracial marriages. Is that correct?
I'm sorry if I'm wrong, which I may be but even after reading the posts several times, i still get the same vibe from Funk's post's and choice of quotes.
Really, I just wan't to see equality for all people, and not just based on skin color. So i don't see why all of america's cultural inequalities on the system of marriage can't be discussed at the same time with out flaming.
Now if you exscuse me, I need to go practice
If you go back to funk's original post that I quoted, in that post he quotes a post of cheese's. In addition to quoting Cheese he adds a +1. Now correct me if I'm wrong but that means that he agree's with Cheese's statement. At that point he adds to the statement by saying that this is only an issue because historically there have been laws to descrimate people by their skin color.
Then a few posts later he says:
"Interesting you should say this. Im not stating for or against it, but I dont recall it being legal in any other country either. The UK for instance."
So between all of these statments, through their phrasing and use of emoticons, I got this feeling:
My understanding from what funkdamental was stating was that it is ok for homosexual marriages to not be allowed simply because it is not specifically written in a law. Where as this justice shouldn't be allowed to follow his judgement, because it is "legal" for interracial marriages. Is that correct?
I'm sorry if I'm wrong, which I may be but even after reading the posts several times, i still get the same vibe from Funk's post's and choice of quotes.
Really, I just wan't to see equality for all people, and not just based on skin color. So i don't see why all of america's cultural inequalities on the system of marriage can't be discussed at the same time with out flaming.
Now if you exscuse me, I need to go practice
I cannot speak for Funkdamental, but I did not say that it was alright for same sex marriages to be denied. I stated the fact that they are illegal in most jurisdictions. If you got anything else out of my posts, you were reading into them because I said nothing negative about same sex marriage.
It seems that you have a need to prove that Blacks are predjudiced too, does that make you feel better about issues you might have?
As for the justice of the peace having the legal right to rrefuse to perform the marriage, you seem to have contradicted yourself. Earlier you said there was a difference between what is right and what is legal yet you seem the back the judge's legal right to be a jerk.
As for the Justice of the Peace himself, I would have respected him better if he had simply said he didn't believe in interracial marriage, and left it at that. Saying he is concerned about the children is lame. Louisiana is full of highly mixed "blacks," and has been that way for centuries. I think they are functioning quite well.
1-- Why is it that every time someone has a nominally different opinion than yours, you always assume its someone that has something to prove against african americans? I've seen you do it several times in different threads over the last couple of days. Frankly I think it's offensive that you automatically assume someone is racist just because they have a different perspective than you and it seems like a cop out to what could be an otherwise productive conversation.
2-- I dont see How I contradicted myself at all, What is right isn't always legal and vice versa. In that same post I mentioned How I thought the man's decision was an immoral one, but it is still his legal right to refuse to wed the couple. If you can explain further how I contradicted myself, Im all ears.
3-- Bigot's always try to justify their opinions, I quess it's a way for them to think better of themselves that they are doing it not just ofskin color/sexual orientation, they instead insist that they are doing it for the betterment of society.
A justice of the peace is a state agent. Off the top of my head and without doing any additional research, I think a case could probably be made that this is a substantive due process deprivation in violation of the equal protection clause of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment.
The tangent was the legal difference between interracial marriage and same sex marriage, whoch was brought up for who knows what reason. Here's what Dr. Cheese said... I'll highlight what you may have missed:
"The obvious difference to me is that same sex marriages are not yet legal in about 80% of the States in America. If they become legal, than I hope that the public will find a refusal to grant people their rights offensive also".
Does that sound like he thinks it's okay? Does it sound like he's against them? If not, why are a couple of you jumping to that conclusion?
He keeps telling people this in plain English and it just continues to bounce off.
I'm genuinely curious as to what you think this means:
"Im not stating for or against it".
You've quoted it a couple of times now. Why do you think he's for it?
Because he said it was okay or that's what you want to believe he's saying despite what he's actually said?
I'm sorry if I'm wrong, which I may be but even after reading the posts several times, i still get the same vibe from Funk's post's and choice of quotes.
Really, I just wan't to see equality for all people, and not just based on skin color. So i don't see why all of america's cultural inequalities on the system of marriage can't be discussed at the same time with out flaming.
Now if you exscuse me, I need to go practice
Wow... what flaming are you speaking of? What I'm seeing is a fairly strange, considering it apparently won't stop, misreading of actual statements. It appears no explanation can fix that.
Just curious... you quoted everything but his first paragraph. Why?
"I cannot speak for Funkdamental, but I did not say that it was alright for same sex marriages to be denied. I stated the fact that they are illegal in most jurisdictions. If you got anything else out of my posts, you were reading into them because I said nothing negative about same sex marriage".
TMI? Your response?
I was under the impression they were state agents too, licensed to do what they do. When I went to the JP here it was at the county office building.
1. I point out alot of negative feeling towards African Americans because there is alot of negative feeling towards African Americans, and I am not shy about pointing it out. I still want to know why you felt a need to suggest I was against same sex marriage when I simply stated the legal reality. As for offending you, I was not trying to, and this is a discussion board. My opinions don't have to make you feel good, and your opinions don't have to make me feel good either.
2. I missed it where you said the man's actions were immoral, and I apologize for missing that point and making a post suggesting otherwise.
Come on guys, calm down. Relax, have a smoke....take your pick
http://www.totalsmokes.com/Cigarettes_Online/Premium/images/newport.gif
Link Removed
http://www.totalsmokes.com/Cigarettes_Online/Premium/images/newport.gif
Link Removed
