Quote:
Originally posted by Timber Loftis:
Thoran, you're the red herring I'm afraid. If we want to see where these opinions are coming from, we need to look at the applicable law.
You posted the Bill of Rights, the 1st 10 Amendments.
Mass. Ruling: based on Amendments V and XIV.
Recent federal ruling (right to non-intrusion into the gay bedroom): based on Right to Privacy, a penumbra right which is presumed to exist because it is a necessary assumption for the existence of other rights, including those found in Amendments III, IV, V, and others.
The rest you posted was a waste and incomplete. 
|
I don't see how my response was a red herring... certainly it could be incorrect, but it was not an attempted diversion of the issue.
Regarding the issue... Well that's interesting, I'll take a guess that they're suggesting that denying gay partnerships is a "denial of liberty"? 14 seems mostly about states rights (which I was aware was part of the basis for the Mass decision, but not the part we were discussing). You've already mentioned that the Mass ruling didn't suggest that "Gay Marriage" should be legalized, only the legitimacy of Gay Partnerships (which makes sense to me). Since the Mass. ruling is part of the subject of the debate I'll concede that the Bill of Rights reference wasn't a Red Herring to that part of the discussion, however Sultan was specifically discussing Gay Marriage, and as you've said the Mass ruling doesn't seem to take a stand in that regard... how is it that you believe it applies?
How was the rest a waste or incomplete, you're not debating... you're just being contrary!