If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wisconsin Gazette)   U.S. government to recognize Utah gay marriages even if Utah won't   (wisconsingazette.com) divider line 62
    More: Ironic, U.S. government, Utah, opponents of same-sex marriage, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, same-sex couples  
•       •       •

2669 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Jan 2014 at 3:49 PM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



62 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-10 07:14:03 PM

Dimensio: onearmedninja: I guess the federal government is tired of just taking our rights and now they are working on taking states rights also.

Rights are exclusively a property of individuals. States are a collective; the concept of a "collective right" is nonsensical.


"Biatches don't have rights - pimps do."
Ayn Rand
Rand Paul
 
2014-01-10 07:20:23 PM

dstrick44: And Baptists can't fark standing up


Well, what if someone saw them? They might think they were DANCING!!
 
2014-01-10 07:41:57 PM
And the Regressives of the nation, bound to their daddy god, screech and whine as they're pulled into the 21st Century.
 
2014-01-10 07:43:06 PM
The tag should be Obvious.

Utah does not recognize SSMs  which are contrary to its constitution and since it won a stay pending its appeal.
The federal government does recognize SSMs.

Thus the headline.

Of course if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that equality is demanded by the U.S. Constitution then Utah's constitution becomes moot.  That day will come.  It will probably happen in the next couple years.   If a Republican president is able to replace a justice prior to such a ruling, it might delay it by 10 to 15 years or so.  But by then it is very possible that Utah's voters will fix the problem making the high court moot.  A quarter of a century tops, the voters will vote for SSM in every state...
 
2014-01-10 07:45:31 PM

menschenfresser: gja: How about we stop recognizing states who refuse to make sense?

This. Dump half of them. They want their evangelical theocracy with no taxes, no government and nothing civilized? Fine. Have fun. Meanwhile, the first-world part of the country can actually begin running a country like grown-ups without their derp, The redneck right is wrong about everything, has always been wrong about everything, and is even proud of being wrong. They're nothing but a nuisance to intelligent people.

 Better off without 'em.


Yeah, but then they'd apply for (and get) foreign aid from the US that so cruelly oppressed them by allowing them to secede.
 
2014-01-10 08:10:29 PM

Dimensio: onearmedninja: I guess the federal government is tired of just taking our rights and now they are working on taking states rights also.

Rights are exclusively a property of individuals. States are a collective; the concept of a "collective right" is nonsensical.


Yep.

"Collective rights" are nonsense. If they were to exist, then there would be a point in time where adding an additional person to a group would cause everyone in that group to suddenly gain a new political right.

And therefore, person A could have more rights than person B, based on the sizes of their respective group.

At what group size does that event occur? Where does the new right come from? See the problem?
 
2014-01-10 08:55:35 PM

zimbach: You can't take away a right of the people after you give it to them, because that would do irreparable harm to those who exercised that right.


The 13th and 18th Amendments disagree with you.

/You do realize that a right of slaves to be free abnegates a right of slaveowners to hold property, yes?
//I hate slavery, but it's still true.
 
2014-01-10 09:23:28 PM
Quick solution, un-recognize all of Utah as a state. Statehood was only a sick trick to get the immigrant Missouri rubes to kill all the Indians in the area.

21st Century Result: The Northern part of Ute Territory becomes Nevada, the Southern part of Ute Territory becomes Arizona.
 
2014-01-10 11:15:24 PM

menschenfresser: gja: How about we stop recognizing states who refuse to make sense?

This. Dump half of them. They want their evangelical theocracy with no taxes, no government and nothing civilized? Fine. Have fun. Meanwhile, the first-world part of the country can actually begin running a country like grown-ups without their derp, The redneck right is wrong about everything, has always been wrong about everything, and is even proud of being wrong. They're nothing but a nuisance to intelligent people.

 Better off without 'em.


I am sure the states of North Dakota, Montana and Alaska would do quite fine with their natural resources money.

On another note, this sucks for the gay married couples (on a number of levels obviously) from a tax perspective. Get to file a joint return for Federal taxes, then individual for the state returns.

As if filing taxes was confusing enough...
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-01-10 11:55:27 PM

Truther: I am sure the states of North Dakota, Montana and Alaska would do quite fine with their natural resources money.


"Oh, you want to transport that stuff? Here is our tariff schedule. Do have a look. Checks are payable to The U.S.A.. K-thnx-bye"
 
2014-01-10 11:58:42 PM

Truther: menschenfresser: gja: How about we stop recognizing states who refuse to make sense?

This. Dump half of them. They want their evangelical theocracy with no taxes, no government and nothing civilized? Fine. Have fun. Meanwhile, the first-world part of the country can actually begin running a country like grown-ups without their derp, The redneck right is wrong about everything, has always been wrong about everything, and is even proud of being wrong. They're nothing but a nuisance to intelligent people.

 Better off without 'em.

I am sure the states of North Dakota, Montana and Alaska would do quite fine with their natural resources money.

On another note, this sucks for the gay married couples (on a number of levels obviously) from a tax perspective. Get to file a joint return for Federal taxes, then individual for the state returns.

As if filing taxes was confusing enough...


It sucks, but it's a problem at the federal level I would rather have than not to have. Filing jointly with my spouse at the federal level is going to be a tax benefit for me. However, yes, I live in the northern Teahadist state of Indiana, so I will have to do "fake" single federal tax returns to then use to file individual state tax returns. That will be a major pain in the ass. However, I wouldn't have the privilege to even have to deal with that without federal recognition of my same-sex marriage even though I live in a non-marriage equality state. That's because my spouse is not an American, so I only got the right to sponsor him for a green card after the June Supreme Court decision against DOMA section 3. I am VERY happy to say he is now a US permanent resident. So, here, I thank the Obama administration VERY much for moving very fast to recognize same-sex marriages and to recognize them based on the state or country performed rather than location of current residence. After over a two year long distance relationship, we now have a home together here in the US. Thanks Justice Kennedy and Obama.
 
2014-01-11 02:04:07 AM
I think we all can recognize a gay marriage when we see one.
 
Displayed 12 of 62 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report