The right's dangerous legal argument

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-13-2008
The right's dangerous legal argument
1537
Thu, 03-05-2009 - 9:46pm

Appearing for the supporters of Prop 8, Kenneth Starr, the former Whitewater prosecutor, said the people hold the right to modify the state constitution by adding or subtracting protections for civil rights.


Court appears ready to uphold Prop. 8



Full length fiction: worlds undone


"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson


"You think you know, sir!" ~ Cornflake Girl ~ Tori Amos.


Full length fiction: worlds undone

"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-13-2008
Mon, 03-23-2009 - 11:14pm

Yes, that's called state regulation.


Actually, upholding the terms under which they gained tax exempt status. They own property that might otherwise be taxable, the state agrees to the break if they meet certain terms.


They broke the terms, they pay. Simple.


If a mininster opens their mouth in church and says vote for Person B, well, bye bye tax exemption.



Full length fiction: worlds undone


"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson


"You think you know, sir!" ~ Cornflake Girl ~ Tori Amos.


Full length fiction: worlds undone

"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-11-2009
Mon, 03-23-2009 - 11:19pm

They are a religious entity and should be exempt and allowed to discriminate within the bounds of their religion.


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-11-2009
Mon, 03-23-2009 - 11:20pm

"I think she means afford them legally recognized marriage ceremonies"


LOL.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2009
Mon, 03-23-2009 - 11:38pm

If NOW claimed to be renting out a piece of property they owned to the public, but refused to rent it to men, then indeed I would think the tax exempt status of that property would be revoked.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-12-2009
Mon, 03-23-2009 - 11:43pm

~Why? I thought the "gay argument" was all about rights? Now it seems to be about social parity. Hmmm...~

>>> "Seems" being the key word, given that

>>> a) it's about equal access to civic institutions

Civil unions wouldn't provide equal access to civic institutions?

>>> b) one tangent on this thread doesn't = "the gay argument".

Thus far, the "gay argument" has always been harping about "rights"...not "you have to accept my behavior and make it equitable with your sacred and long-standing traditions."

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-11-2009
Mon, 03-23-2009 - 11:50pm

"If NOW claimed to be renting out a piece of property they owned to the public, but refused to rent it to men, then indeed I would think the tax exempt status of that property would be revoked.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-22-2009
Tue, 03-24-2009 - 12:17am

~That's no an argument that carries much weight with those who oppose redefining marriage.~


Nope, but in my experience it goes a long way with those sitting on the fence.




Kate


~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-12-2009
Tue, 03-24-2009 - 12:20am
No dream...just a realistic assessment of people's reactions when they realize that they've been bamboozled.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-22-2009
Tue, 03-24-2009 - 12:24am

Oh, I'm sorry, I should have spelled it out more carefully.


Our largest Protestant Christian denomination

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-22-2009
Tue, 03-24-2009 - 12:31am

~Civil unions wouldn't provide equal access to civic institutions?~


Oh, I see where you are going with this... the old claim that they already have a right to enter the civic institution of marriage, ie.

Pages