Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

[Kilgamayan]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT MARRIAGE IS!

Then what is marriage? Maybe it would help all your curt, condescending statements a bit if you actually presented a stance of your own.

you cant say "well it's easy to change the definition of marriage so lets do it."

i want to change the definition of dog to include cats. it would be really easy.

i want to change the definition of freedom of religion to mean that i can stone someone to death if they're a sinner.

i want to change the definition of the N-word to something less offensive.

If you get a large enough mass of people who agree with you, then go ahead and do those things. Look at suffrage and the civil rights movement. Those folks didn't roll over and go "oh man we're never going to change anything let's just give up". They got off their asses and did something.

things arent going to change just because it's convenient. this is the way it is, and this is the way it's going to stay.

1) Says who?
2) Why?

[FishFishRevolution]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

I think this is a viable post considering this used to be a chit-chat topic and I should've posted it then.

[Afrobean]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

So, for you people against gay marriages, do you have a problem with them getting all of the legal rights a married couple would, but simply calling it something else?

If so, why? Two gay people wouldn't be able to live in union doesn't damage "your" definition of marriage. It doesn't hurt anyone. All it does is give these people the same advantages that any married couple gets.

Additionally, is all this really worth arguing over the semantics of the word? Who gives a ****? It's not like your religion is the owner of the word, and it's not even like your religion ISSUES OUT MARRIAGE LICENSES. It's the government's job to regulate marriage, and thus, religious factors, such as the fact that homosexuality is a sin, should be 100% irrelevent.

[Squeek]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

Anti-gay marriagers: Who are you to come between the love of two individuals you don't even know?

It's quite natural for people who love each other to want to have benefits and status as a married couple. That's pretty much what a marriage is all about. A Civil Union does not cut it. When people ask you for your status, there's single, married, or divorced. There's no "civil-unioned".

If two people love each other, let them get married. The only thing I'm hesitant to allow is person -> animal marriages. That's just weird.

[FoJaR]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

Then what is marriage? Maybe it would help all your curt, condescending statements a bit if you actually presented a stance of your own.

marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

1) Says who?
2) Why?

1. America.

2. Because that's what marriage is.

Afro: fine with homosexual couples having the advantages that heterosexual people get. but it's not marriage. it's friends, with benefits LOL

AND: if the government suddenly refused to give out marriage licenses to heterosexual people, i would still "get married," even if it were only a religious ceremony (by far more important to me than any marriage certificate) and it wouldnt matter that much to me, because in the big picture, i'd be with the person i love.

[FoJaR]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

Anti-gay marriagers: Who are you to come between the love of two individuals you don't even know?

not coming between their love, they are free to love.

It's quite natural for people who love each other to want to have benefits and status as a married couple. That's pretty much what a marriage is all about. A Civil Union does not cut it. When people ask you for your status, there's single, married, or divorced. There's no "civil-unioned".

If two people love each other, let them get married. The only thing I'm hesitant to allow is person -> animal marriages. That's just weird.

soon people will be marrying their right hand for the tax breaks.

[MalReynolds]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

not coming between their love, they are free to love.



soon people will be marrying their right hand for the tax breaks.

That's the same arguement that the insane right uses. "If you let gays get married, soon we'll let people marry dogs!"

Some people, believe it or not, do not want to be married for the tax breaks. Sure, give them a seperate word. But keep it equal, right?

If everyone is granted the same "God given" rights, as per said in the constitution, then how come people of the same sex cannot get married to each other? Or hell, even "Civilly Unionized?"

I mean, "Civil Union" makes it so dem ******s can't get married, but gives them equal rights and a seperate word.

But that's not discrimination based off of creed, race or preference. So, no. No second class citizens.

[FoJaR]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

if i were gay, gay marriage would be legal already.

i'm done arguing.

it's a religious thing, you guys would never understand it.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

That's the same arguement that the insane right uses. "If you let gays get married, soon we'll let people marry dogs!"

I actually don't think that this slippery slope is entirely unfeasible.

With the way trial lawyers are today, I can see someone complaining that his right to be happy is being violated when the state tells him he can't marry his dog. After all, whom is he hurting?

With the right lawyer and the right judge in front of him, it would only take one person. ONE person out of over three hundred million to present the right case to the right person, and it's suddenly okay.

We could try to make laws against it, but again, the right judges could just rule those laws unconstitutional.

Then it's people trying to marry their six-year-old neighbor or daughter.

It's a stretch, I know, but I do think that it's possible. All it takes is one.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[Afrobean]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

Ok, so rather than a Consitutional amendment defining marriage as between specifically a man and a woman, make an amendment defining marriage as between two people.

Problem solved 100%-ly and everyone is happy.

Except the people wanna **** animals, I guess.

[jamuko]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

The easy counter to the dog/six-year-old thing is that:

1. A dog cannot legally give consent.
2. A six-year-old cannot legally give consent.
3. A gay person can.

[Afrobean]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

Isn't the law for being married around the age of majority in most states? Isn't the lowest it goes around 14?

They're not going to go "oh ur right u shud be able to marry toddlers lol we will change that law rite now".

[kilroysd]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

-my stand-
if they love each other and really want to get married, let them.

as long as they aren't affecting my life i dont see why i should care.

[Kilgamayan]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

I have already questioned the legitimacy of this definition in terms of objectivity, among other things. Please explain to me why this is a be-all, end-all, unchangable definition of marriage.

1. America.

America also once thought slavery was a damn fine idea. America's mind is not closed to changing.

soon people will be marrying their right hand for the tax breaks.

- You can't possibly tell me there isn't a single straight marriage in America that's in it for the money.
- If two people are willing to ostracize themselves from a good chunk of society by publicly proclaiming homosexuality just for a few bucks, I say let 'em.

if i were gay, gay marriage would be legal already.

You seem to think pretty highly of yourself in terms of political and governmental influence.

it's a religious thing, you guys would never understand it.

It has already been pointed out that religion has zero place in this particular argument.

Then it's people trying to marry their six-year-old neighbor or daughter.

It's a stretch, I know, but I do think that it's possible. All it takes is one.

Age of consent laws will kick in for the six-year-old part. As for incest at any age, there is a legitimate moral argument against it involving the potential production of psychological problems within the family so a motion for the legalization of it would likely never get passed.

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

jamuko, Kilga:

We could try to make laws against it, but again, the right judges could just rule those laws unconstitutional.

That's the problem is suits going to the right judges who can circumvent the will of the people and turn down such laws.

The only surefire way around it is what Afro mentioned, but good luck getting an amendment passed.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com