Do you have standing?

I have often questioned why some people think they have the right to inflict their beliefs on others, why it matters to others who someone falls in love with, what their religion is or for that matter whether they have one. The short answer is that it shouldn’t, and legally, it doesn’t. Our friend Keith has stated this case far better than I could have, so today I am sharing Keith’s words of wisdom with you. Thank you, Keith, for this excellent post!


Do you have standing? What does that mean? It is a legal term that asks whether you are personally impacted by what you perceive as a slight.

Before the US Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage was a protected right, it first ruled on California’s Proposition 8. This state law banned gays and lesbians from marrying. What was interesting is a conservative and liberal attorney joined together to fight this injustice. The key part of their argument was do people who marry have any impact on other people? They argued successfully that other folks do not have standing to prevent such marriage.

If what I do with my life does not impact you whatsoever, even though you may not like it, you do not have standing. And, vice versa. I have no standing in what you do, as long as you are not harming me. If you choose to have…

View original post 359 more words

23 thoughts on “Do you have standing?

  1. This is so true. It seems so simple..if a choice causes no harm to anyone and doesn’t negatively affect their life or the lives of others, why do they care? What’s really behind it? A desire to be “right” and have their views and their religious beliefs validated so they can feel righteous or chosen? A need for control?

    And in politics, a political platform belief and who one supports is their right, of course, even though I sure wish I could influence people away from trump.

    But both of these areas can cross a line and you would have standing. In politics you would have standing against unnecessary wars, environmental degradation, selecting people to treat as sub humans and taking away your freedoms. People would be hurt and killed by these.

    And in religion you would have standing against exclusion and condemnation of religions and beliefs that are not yours. And most importantly, you would have standing against the demise of church and state separation, which our very country was founded on. People would be hurt and ostracized by these as well.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Unfortunately, you are quite right … both have the potential to harm people, to be discriminatory in nature. I know of at least one religious organization that defies EEOC rules by refusing to hire LGBT or minorities. So far they have gotten by with it, for they are located in a small community where nobody has presented a legal challenge, but those who have been denied a job would certainly have grounds to do so, do have a standing. I have yet to figure out why humans cannot simply be content to ‘live and let live’, but instead must attempt to force their own ideas on everybody. Similarly, only on a larger scale, the U.S. is trying to effect a regime change in Iran. That is well above and beyond our rights, but it would not be the first time.

      Liked by 1 person

      • People cannot stand to live and let live because they firmly believe there is a right way, and a wrong way. This comes straight from the bible even if it is not said in so many words. People living in Sodom and Gomorrah were living as they liked, and god condemned them for doing so. Did he have standing, No! But he took it upon himself anyway, and destroyed the people and their cities. Nor was this his first such act. In the time of Noah, god looked and saw that not only were all the people except Noah and his family living wrongly, but so were all the innocent birds of the air, and animals of the land. Probably if he could have figured out how to kill all the fishes in the sea he would have done that too, but the writers of the bible slipped up, and forgot about the beings already living in the waters, so I guess they were living correctly according to god’s rules, though no one acknowlefges them either way.
        Anyways, these are (were) the acts that gave permission to humans to butt into other peope’s lives, because they believe they are living the right way, and everyone else is living the wrong way.
        Sheer arrogance! Of course, but who are we to blame them–they are only doing what their god already did. The bible tells them so.
        Oh, the bible is a work of historical fiction? I guess someone should point that out to them. Maybe shove it up those places where their lights don’t shine either…

        Liked by 1 person

        • Now now … I’d rather not have to get that close to their posteriors to shove that book … well, let’s just say I’d rather not, thank you! You likely have a valid point … they truly feel they have the right, based on the precedent set forth. However, and I am not a biblical scholar, have never even read more than the first few pages,which kept putting me to sleep, but I seem to recall that there is something in there that says, “judge not”? Hypocrisy at its finest, eh?


          • Little quibbles. They just look at the big things, not the little things. Or was it the other way around? No matter. Stay away from their posteriors, yes. Who knows what kind of sh*t comes out of them…

            Liked by 1 person

            • You were right the second time … they nitpick the little things, but turn a blind eye to things like a president who lies constantly, or poor people starving to death. No worries … I shall keep my distance.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s