Page 27 of 28 FirstFirst ... 1725262728 LastLast
Results 781 to 810 of 831

Thread: Prop 8 Has Been Overturned

  1. #781
    𐐐𐐄𐐢𐐆𐐤𐐝 𐐓𐐅 𐐜 𐐢𐐃𐐡𐐔 Uncle Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Where ∑ ★ = 1
    Posts
    20,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LVAllen View Post
    Yeah, I'm still waiting for you to show evidence of any church that has been successfully sued and forced to perform a religious ceremony against its own doctrine. It's a bogeyman that the religious fascists like to prop up so they can scream about the gay agenda.
    They haven't... yet. But it is a liability if there is a possibility that the church has to defend its religious freedom. Why else would the church come out with a statement on The Equality Act? Or are you saying the leaders of the church are a bunch of religious fascists and they are just propping up bogeymen for us?

    It is hard to not see all the religious freedom vs LGBT rights lawsuits happening all over the place...

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44501139

    https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-...reedom-n838016

    https://www.vox.com/2018/10/11/17961...nation-lawsuit

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...o-discriminate

    https://www.theatlantic.com/educatio...ruling/398306/

    Potential of possible lawsuits = liability. Eliminate the potential (e.g., get out of business of marrying people) and the church eliminates some of the liability.

    "If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
    "I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
    "Yet I still see wisdom in that which Uncle Ted posts." -creek.
    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  2. #782

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ted View Post
    They haven't... yet. But it is a liability if there is a possibility that the church has to defend its religious freedom. Why else would the church come out with a statement on The Equality Act? Or are you saying the leaders of the church are a bunch of religious fascists and they are just propping up bogeymen for us?
    Well, seeing as the Church has never made the claim that the Equality Act will force it to conduct marriage ceremonies in opposition to its own doctrine, I'd suggest that the Church came out with a statement on the Equality Act for the reasons it said it did.

  3. #783

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ted View Post

    Potential of possible lawsuits = liability.
    I don't care what 4chan says, that is not the definition of liability.

  4. #784

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Applejack View Post
    I don't care what 4chan says, that is not the definition of liability.
    It's probably semantics with respect to what fits "legal definitions" as opposed to how words might be reasonably used among lay persons. You could certainly call it risk mitigation.

  5. #785
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    22,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bo Diddley View Post
    It's probably semantics with respect to what fits "legal definitions" as opposed to how words might be reasonably used among lay persons. You could certainly call it risk mitigation.
    Agreed, except it is not semantics. Nonetheless, I think UT is generally correct and I have long thought the church should get out of the marrying business, a least in the eyes of the state.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

  6. #786

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creekster View Post
    Agreed, except it is not semantics. Nonetheless, I think UT is generally correct and I have long thought the church should get out of the marrying business, a least in the eyes of the state.
    Semantics: the meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text. I'll defer to you because I have no doubt you're much smarter than me in such things. But where did I go wrong? Where's DH when you need him?

  7. #787
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    22,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bo Diddley View Post
    Semantics: the meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text. I'll defer to you because I have no doubt you're much smarter than me in such things. But where did I go wrong? Where's DH when you need him?
    Claiming that something is "just semantics" is an easy and often lazy way for people to ignore distinctions in definitions that can be meaningful and add precision to discussions. Saying that the way a lawyer uses the term liability, when discussing a lawsuit (!) is just 'semantics' ignores what the word liability means inthe very contest in which it is being discussed. It is "semantics" in the sense that we are talking about the meaning of a word, but it is not a meaningless distinction. It is, rather, a precise use of a term in a particular context. My point was that even though I think UT was using the word incorrectly, his point remains valid.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

  8. #788

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creekster View Post
    ... I have long thought the church should get out of the marrying business, a least in the eyes of the state.
    Steady the arc much, Uzzah?

  9. #789

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creekster View Post
    Claiming that something is "just semantics" is an easy and often lazy way for people to ignore distinctions in definitions that can be meaningful and add precision to discussions. Saying that the way a lawyer uses the term liability, when discussing a lawsuit (!) is just 'semantics' ignores what the word liability means inthe very contest in which it is being discussed. It is "semantics" in the sense that we are talking about the meaning of a word, but it is not a meaningless distinction. It is, rather, a precise use of a term in a particular context. My point was that even though I think UT was using the word incorrectly, his point remains valid.
    Ok, but I didn't claim it was "just semantics". In fact, I qualified the statement by showing how I was using the term semantics in such a way to fit its definition.

  10. #790
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    22,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bo Diddley View Post
    Ok, but I didn't claim it was "just semantics". In fact, I qualified the statement by showing how I was using the term semantics in such a way to fit its definition.
    Ok. Your post was perfectly fine and I do not mean to quibble or disagree with you at all. Good job.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

  11. #791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creekster View Post
    Ok. Your post was perfectly fine and I do not mean to quibble or disagree with you at all. Good job.
    I thought that was the kind of back and forth you enjoy.

  12. #792
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    22,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bo Diddley View Post
    I thought that was the kind of back and forth you enjoy.
    Only when I think it matters or I have time to spare.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

  13. #793

    Default

    Let's not let this get lost in the white noise:

    Quote Originally Posted by YOhio View Post
    Steady the arc much, Uzzah?

  14. #794
    𐐐𐐄𐐢𐐆𐐤𐐝 𐐓𐐅 𐐜 𐐢𐐃𐐡𐐔 Uncle Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Where ∑ ★ = 1
    Posts
    20,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Applejack View Post
    I don't care what 4chan says, that is not the definition of liability.
    So should I only buy liability insurance when someone is suing me?
    "If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
    "I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
    "Yet I still see wisdom in that which Uncle Ted posts." -creek.
    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  15. #795

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ted View Post
    So should I only buy liability insurance when someone is suing me?
    when the probability of losing a lawsuit is approximately zero I would suggest not getting insurance with that particular coverage. I mean you can probably find an insurance company to give you an alien probe rider but why would you worry about that?
    Dyslexics are teople poo...

  16. #796
    𐐐𐐄𐐢𐐆𐐤𐐝 𐐓𐐅 𐐜 𐐢𐐃𐐡𐐔 Uncle Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Where ∑ ★ = 1
    Posts
    20,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flystripper View Post
    when the probability of losing a lawsuit is approximately zero I would suggest not getting insurance with that particular coverage. I mean you can probably find an insurance company to give you an alien probe rider but why would you worry about that?
    Because people notice that I live down the street from George W. Bush and think I am rich or something... That alien probe rider, I am guessing, is only a few pennies more.
    "If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
    "I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
    "Yet I still see wisdom in that which Uncle Ted posts." -creek.
    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  17. #797
    Princeps Inter Pares
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,484

    Default

    The semantic point aside, you have to worry about more than just losing the lawsuit. It is not at all uncommon for defendants who are certain they would win at trial to fold just because they can’t afford to get all the way through to their win at trial. Lawyers are too expensive.
    τὸν ἥλιον ἀνατέλλοντα πλείονες ἢ δυόμενον προσκυνοῦσιν

  18. #798
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    29,437

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Ted View Post
    So should I only buy liability insurance when someone is suing me?
    Liability insurance protects you from your (future) liability.
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  19. #799

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by All-American View Post
    The semantic point aside, you have to worry about more than just losing the lawsuit. It is not at all uncommon for defendants who are certain they would win at trial to fold just because they can’t afford to get all the way through to their win at trial. Lawyers are too expensive.
    I would venture a guess that the mormon church does not find itself in such a position.

  20. #800
    The dude abides Jeff Lebowski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The heart of the UC
    Posts
    49,069

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Walter Sobchak View Post
    Oh, brother. Just provide a link to your podcast already.

    Good for the LDS Church (and the Catholic Church, and the ...). The Equality Act is a legal land grab and should be met with vigorous resistance. For example, gender identity is far too ambiguous to be given a protected class status.
    No kidding.

    From the opening line in the church statement:

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is deeply concerned that the ongoing conflicts between religious liberty and LGBT rights are poisoning our civil discourse, eroding the free exercise of religion and preventing diverse Americans of good will from living together in respect and peace.
    Initial response to this statement on social media is yet more proof of how broken civil discourse is in America right now.
    "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
    "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
    "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

  21. #801
    𐐐𐐄𐐢𐐆𐐤𐐝 𐐓𐐅 𐐜 𐐢𐐃𐐡𐐔 Uncle Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Where ∑ ★ = 1
    Posts
    20,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    Liability insurance protects you from your (future) liability.
    Well that is stoopid... Why don't they just call it "(future) liability insurance" then?
    "If there is one thing I am, it's always right." -Ted Nugent.
    "I honestly believe saying someone is a smart lawyer is damning with faint praise. The smartest people become engineers and scientists." -SU.
    "Yet I still see wisdom in that which Uncle Ted posts." -creek.
    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  22. #802
    One man.....one pie Moliere's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The Republic of Tejas
    Posts
    21,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
    Initial response to this statement on social media is yet more proof of how broken civil discourse is in America right now.
    I don’t disagree. I’d also argue that the church’s statement on this is also proof of how broken the system is right now. It’s not an unreasonable proposal to provide legal protections to certain groups. Just because it falls a little outside the church’s wishes doesn’t mean they should oppose it. I do like that the church has provided a model of what they would support, but they seem to only support something if it fits 100% into what they want.
    "Discipleship is not a spectator sport. We cannot expect to experience the blessing of faith by standing inactive on the sidelines any more than we can experience the benefits of health by sitting on a sofa watching sporting events on television and giving advice to the athletes. And yet for some, “spectator discipleship” is a preferred if not primary way of worshipping." -Pres. Uchtdorf

  23. #803
    Princeps Inter Pares
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    11,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Applejack View Post
    I would venture a guess that the mormon church does not find itself in such a position.
    Maybe not that they "can't afford" a trial, but I'd venture that they settle any number of meritless cases to avoid the cost of trial.
    τὸν ἥλιον ἀνατέλλοντα πλείονες ἢ δυόμενον προσκυνοῦσιν

  24. #804
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    22,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moliere View Post
    I don’t disagree. I’d also argue that the church’s statement on this is also proof of how broken the system is right now. It’s not an unreasonable proposal to provide legal protections to certain groups. Just because it falls a little outside the church’s wishes doesn’t mean they should oppose it. I do like that the church has provided a model of what they would support, but they seem to only support something if it fits 100% into what they want.
    Isn't what you support/propose to happen by definition (semantics!) 100% what you want?
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

  25. #805

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moliere View Post
    I don’t disagree. I’d also argue that the church’s statement on this is also proof of how broken the system is right now. It’s not an unreasonable proposal to provide legal protections to certain groups. Just because it falls a little outside the church’s wishes doesn’t mean they should oppose it. I do like that the church has provided a model of what they would support, but they seem to only support something if it fits 100% into what they want.
    Not just that but they also explicitly stated that freedom of religion should be given substantially more protections than the protections afforded to LGBTQ people. It sure seems like an odd stance to take considering the disparity of discrimination levied at religion as opposed to LGBTQ people. For example, I don't recall anyone recently putting millions of dollars into advocacy to prevent religious people from marrying.

    Also, to the Dude's point about civil discourse, it is absolutely a problem in our society. One that the LDS church has contributed to. The LDS church wasn't exactly civil in their opposition to gay marriage.
    The crux of what has traumatized us about CUF/CG is that we thought they were our friends. And their identity as BYU fans turned out to be the most important thing to them. What empty lives! What a damning indictment of the LDS Church!
    --SeattleUte

    He who drinks beer sleeps well. He who sleeps well cannot sin. He who does not sin goes to heaven. The logic is impeccable.
    --Charles W. Bamforth, Ph.D.

  26. #806
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    29,437

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MartyFunkhouser View Post
    Not just that but they also explicitly stated that freedom of religion should be given substantially more protections than the protections afforded to LGBTQ people. It sure seems like an odd stance to take considering the disparity of discrimination levied at religion as opposed to LGBTQ people. For example, I don't recall anyone recently putting millions of dollars into advocacy to prevent religious people from marrying.

    Also, to the Dude's point about civil discourse, it is absolutely a problem in our society. One that the LDS church has contributed to. The LDS church wasn't exactly civil in their opposition to gay marriage.
    I'll say this again: doesn't a constitutionally guaranteed right (one that was a pillar of the founding of this country) deserve more protection than a non-constitutionally guaranteed right?
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  27. #807
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    29,437

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by creekster View Post
    Isn't what you support/propose to happen by definition (semantics!) 100% what you want?
    No. Ever heard of compromise?
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  28. #808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    I'll say this again: doesn't a constitutionally guaranteed right (one that was a pillar of the founding of this country) deserve more protection than a non-constitutionally guaranteed right?
    I think you are actually looking at two constitutionally protected rights here. There is that whole equal protection clause.
    The crux of what has traumatized us about CUF/CG is that we thought they were our friends. And their identity as BYU fans turned out to be the most important thing to them. What empty lives! What a damning indictment of the LDS Church!
    --SeattleUte

    He who drinks beer sleeps well. He who sleeps well cannot sin. He who does not sin goes to heaven. The logic is impeccable.
    --Charles W. Bamforth, Ph.D.

  29. #809
    My Mic Sounds Nice falafel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Las Wegas!
    Posts
    29,437

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MartyFunkhouser View Post
    I think you are actually looking at two constitutionally protected rights here. There is that whole equal protection clause.
    Serious question, because I don't know the answer. Has the type of equal protection for LGBQT people you are advocating ever been recognized as a constitutionally protected right?
    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

  30. #810
    It is NOT a monkey! creekster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Creek
    Posts
    22,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by falafel View Post
    No. Ever heard of compromise?
    He wasn't criticizing the church's negotiating stance, he was criticising the church's stated position.
    PLesa excuse the tpyos.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •