Gay marriage ruling about to come down

[fredtoast]

(06-27-2015, 04:55 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I guess you don't get dignity.  Dignity is from within, and you can be worthy of respect whether you are given it or not. Dignity is being treated like an animal, but not act like one.   Dignity is not determined by others.

This is just one narrow definition of the word and it was not what the majority decision was speaking about.

Or are you also going to argue that the word dignify can only be used when talking about god and that god gave the slaves liberty instead of the federal government.

[*bfine32*]

Apparently Fred cannot grasp the simple concept that no one can give you self-worth (dignity). Maybe the sage words of Whitney Houston will strike a cord:

[*michaelsean*]

(06-27-2015, 05:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is just one narrow definition of the word and it was not what the majority decision was speaking about.

Or are you also going to argue that the word dignify can only be used when talking about god and that god gave the slaves liberty instead of the federal government.

I'm not arguing anything about dignify. He said they had dignity and from what I understand he is correct.

[WhoDeyWho]

(06-27-2015, 04:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So you don't think Thomas received any advantage from having his grandfather take him in out of abject poverty and send him to a private all-white high school?

You do realize it is possible to give a guy credit for working hard, but at the same time admit that he had privileges that other did not.  I hope someday to give my daughters' advantages that other people don't have.  There is nothing wrong with that.  But I don't want my daughters to grow up and claim that everyone has equal opportunity in this country.

This sounds like  Obama's "you didn't build that" speech.  I'm sure he probably did get some benefit from his grandfather helping him out.  That said, a lot of people get help from a grandparent and don't end up at Yale and on the Supreme Court bench.

If you want to be a literalist about things, of course there's no such thing as "equal opportunity" and there's probably not a person in the country who wasn't helped along the way by someone.  That said, it doesn't sound like Thomas was a legacy at Yale University.  

[fredtoast]

(06-27-2015, 05:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Apparently Fred cannot grasp the simple concept that no one can give you self-worth (dignity). Maybe the sage words of Whitney Houston will strike a cord:

And you can't grasp the simple concept that it is possible to bestow dignity in lots of ways.  That is why we intelligent people know there is a word called "dignify" that describes this action.  And that is exactly what the Supreme Court did in the case of Same sex marriage.  Instead of classifying same sex couples as second class citizens not worthy of being married in the eyes of the law we dignified their relationships by elevating them to the same level as every other citizen.

And I am not really that impressed about what a crack head who died from a drug overdose has to say about her "dignity".  If that is what you want to glorify as "dignity" then you can keep it.

[fredtoast]

(06-27-2015, 05:54 PM)WhoDeyWho Wrote: If you want to be a literalist about things, of course there's no such thing as "equal opportunity"

I'd rather be a literalist than a person who doesn't think a black guy who was taken from abject poverty and placed in a private all-white school in Georgia in the 1960's did have any advantage over other poor black kids. 

[*bfine32*]

(06-27-2015, 07:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And you can't grasp the simple concept that it is possible to bestow dignity in lots of ways.  That is why we intelligent people know there is a word called "dignify" that describes this action.  And that is exactly what the Supreme Court did in the case of Same sex marriage.  Instead of classifying same sex couples as second class citizens not worthy of being married in the eyes of the law we dignified their relationships by elevating them to the same level as every other citizen.

And I am not really that impressed about what a crack head who died from a drug overdose has to say about her "dignity".  If that is what you want to glorify as "dignity" then you can keep it.

Well I suppose you can change the word used if you want; once you are shown that your argument using the actual word was ********.

The unfortunate thing for you is that Thomas never used the word dignify. You just decided to introduce it in an attempt to make your reasoning for considering him to be an Uncle Tom less ridiculous. 

Man I will be glad when I'm intelligent enough to know all those words.  

[CKwi88]

I've gotta say, reading Justice Thomas' dissent was just mind-boggling. Amazing to think that SCOTUS justice would take that line of thinking.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

Did we just spend two pages arguing over the definition of the words dignity and dignify?

[*bfine32*]

(06-27-2015, 08:20 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Did we just spend two pages arguing over the definition of the words dignity and dignify?

Nope. Everybody knows the definition off dignity. The difference came as to whether or not someone has to give you self-worth (dignity).

Now that I write it out; that was actually sillier than debating the definition. 

[*bfine32*]

(06-27-2015, 08:11 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: I've gotta say, reading Justice Thomas' dissent was just mind-boggling. Amazing to think that SCOTUS justice would take that line of thinking.

I think it was more of a rebuttal to Kennedy's use of the word dignity a few times in his Majority Opinion. Many Law experts referenced it to more of a love story than an actual Judicial Opinion. I think one of the Justices said it was actually like something you'd read on a fortune cookie and another said it had nothing to do with the Constitution. 

Surprised none of the Legal experts in this forum has weighed in on the opinion of the Kennedy's Opinion. Just trying to shoot holes in the dissents.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(06-27-2015, 08:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Nope. Everybody knows the definition off dignity. The difference came as to whether or not someone has to give you self-worth (dignity).

Now that I write it out; that was actually sillier than debating the definition. 

Considering it was more of a rhetorical question, only makes you look silly for trying to explain why you participated in said silliness.


Now that I write it out...

[*bfine32*]

(06-27-2015, 09:05 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Considering it was more of a rhetorical question, only makes you look silly for trying to explain why you participated in said silliness.


Now that I right it out...

You may be "right" about my looking silly. 

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(06-27-2015, 09:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You may be "right" about my looking silly. 

May be?

[BmorePat87]

I'm not going to read the bickering, but when I read Thomas' dissent, I assumed he said that line about dignity because he thought that dginity was something that no one can take away from someone, they can only take away from themselves.

Now, I'm not sure I agree with that. You can complete dehumanize someone and destroy their dignity, but I think Thomas was trying to suggest that any person can always hold onto their self worth in the face of atrocities and hardships.

[*bfine32*]

(06-27-2015, 09:11 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: May be?

When do you use maybe and when do you use may be?

This is a common mistake for students learning English (and sometimes native speakers too!).
The simplest explanation is:
Maybe = perhaps
May be = is possibly

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(06-27-2015, 09:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: When do you use maybe and when do you use may be?

This is a common mistake for students learning English (and sometimes native speakers too!).
The simplest explanation is:
Maybe = perhaps
May be = is possibly

You'll have to go find fred if you want to debate definitions of other words.  You guys are better at it than I am.

[*bfine32*]

(06-27-2015, 09:25 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: You'll have to go find fred if you want to debate definitions of other words.  You guys are better at it than I am.

Perhaps something to consider next time you suggest someone looks silly.

[CKwi88]

(06-27-2015, 09:20 PM)Justice Thomas\s dissent Wrote: Since well before 1787, liberty has been understood as freedom from government action, not entitlement to government benefits

Right from the beginning Justice Thomas's dissent makes you wonder if he was paying any attention. 

I mean, did this whole thing not get put up in front of the SCOTUS because the government (The states in question) took an action (banned the recognition of homosexual marriages)? 

And he can ramble on about the definitions of dignity and liberty all he wants. I for one am glad that our highest court does not consider liberty to only pertain to movement.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(06-27-2015, 09:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Perhaps something to consider next time you suggest someone looks silly.

I'll keep that in mind for sure. Thanks for the tip.