Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

[FoJaR]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

yeah just finished reading thread chardish right on.

[ckj846]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

What exactly was the court ruling on this? I'm quite confused. How would gay marriage be considered unconstitutional? Under what amendment? I mean, of course I'm going to be biased in this argument because I am a homosexual myself but I see nothing wrong with gay marriage. Marriage IS an expression of love. Marriage is also a symbol of status. I mean, being discriminatory against homosexuals is ludicrous because in essence, the only difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals is that one prefers honey to jam. That is all. Just because homosexuals can not have kids does not mean they should be made second class citizens because that is imoral and just a ignorant way of thinking. If the government is deeming this unconstitutional, it clearly is having Christian influence because I'm not aware of any other major religion that deems homosexuality as a sin a marriage as a union between a man and a woman only. All I have to say is, I'm glad I'm in California then eh?
O_o

[Laharl]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

I'm pretty sure that this is incredibly wrong.

Separation of Church and State doesn't prevent someone from ever running for office, or prevent a religion from having political weight.

There are two sections of Separation: establishment and free exercise. The former says, "the Establishment Clause was intended to prohibit the federal government from declaring and financially supporting a national religion."

So, the government can't say "we're a Christian country."

The other says that the state cannot prevent someone from exercising his religion.

Nothing about running for office.

I should have said "On a church platform." He'd have to be entirely funded without the help of Governmental Aid, would he run for an office.

[MalReynolds]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

What exactly was the court ruling on this? I'm quite confused. How would gay marriage be considered unconstitutional? Under what amendment? I mean, of course I'm going to be biased in this argument because I am a homosexual myself but I see nothing wrong with gay marriage. Marriage IS an expression of love. Marriage is also a symbol of status. I mean, being discriminatory against homosexuals is ludicrous because in essence, the only difference between heterosexuals and homosexuals is that one prefers honey to jam. That is all. Just because homosexuals can not have kids does not mean they should be made second class citizens because that is imoral and just a ignorant way of thinking. If the government is deeming this unconstitutional, it clearly is having Christian influence because I'm not aware of any other major religion that deems homosexuality as a sin a marriage as a union between a man and a woman only. All I have to say is, I'm glad I'm in California then eh?
O_o

Explain that to the VA legislature and the majority of the voting citizens out here. It's a crazy, foreign land full of ignorance and intolerance.

[FoJaR]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

neither ignorance nor intolerance.

[Squeek]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

As I said before, only the southern part of our state is retarded.

Seriously. Look who voted for and against that amendment. The people who actually know how to read saw that it's incredibly open-ended and needed revising voted against the amendment. The southerners who sit outside with their confederate flags flying, shotgun on one side and dog on the other are the ones who voted for the amendment.

[jamuko]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

I have a really freaking hard time believing how so many people are against gay marriage. I really don't understand their platform at all.

Religion, okay, what if we don't touch your religion then? What if something was created that is EXACTLY like marriage in every way only with all religious aspects extracted?

Are people still against that?

Sorry if I sound more contrary than usual, but this particular issue really boggles my mind. Maybe I give the human race too much credit.

[sleeplessdragn]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

I never really understood the platform against gay marriage either, and I'm usually one to consider both sides of any debate. Even from the standpoint of being completely selfish, what does one have to lose if a completely distant, gay couple gets married. Regardless of the fact that I'm from California, I really don't understand what the big deal is.

[darkshark]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

I never really understood the platform against gay marriage either.

its cause there isnt one, its purely religious influence, stating that marriage is between a man and a woman only, and thats basically their only argument against it, how on earth that argument held up against the incredible spectrum of reasons why gay marriage SHOULD be legal is beyond me.

[Grandiagod]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

The opposition to gay marriage is

A) Basing it of religion, therefore the argument is nullified completely due to seperation of church and state. (This is true, all of the "protection" of marriage associations are religiously funded. All of the anti-gay marriage bills are backed by religious organizations.) Also, they need to shut up and realize that they shouldn't be dictating their own religious morality on people who don't believe in it.

B) Basing it on the "eww gay sex" factor. In that case they need to grow up and accept the fact that people are different.

Fact is that gay marriage is constitutional. Equal rights for everyone regardless.

[User6773]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

Equal rights for everyone regardless.

As we've mentioned, you don't have to be straight to get married. We're talking about the redefinition of marriage, not any kind of discriminatory practice.

Also, if we're going to debate this, we should leave separation of church and state out of it. Many people are against gay marriage for religious reasons, but I'm pretty sure that it's agreed upon that that's a bad reason to enact legislation.

Also, moved to CT.

[FishFishRevolution]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

I think northern va should succeed just like west virginia did, but instead of calling ourselves North Virginia, we should call the state something awesome like Xorboth or Tragnik. (in response to squeek's comment about va's new amendment)

[Kilgamayan]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

I question the idea that requiring a male-female relationship for marriage is universal, objective and not fundamentally flawed.

I also question the idea that a rewrite of the apparent definition of marriage to exclude relationships with specific gender requirements is bad or even inconvenient enough to warrant not doing it.

[MalReynolds]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

As we've mentioned, you don't have to be straight to get married. We're talking about the redefinition of marriage, not any kind of discriminatory practice.

Also, if we're going to debate this, we should leave separation of church and state out of it. Many people are against gay marriage for religious reasons, but I'm pretty sure that it's agreed upon that that's a bad reason to enact legislation.

Also, moved to CT.

So, we'll just give them a seperate word. Seperate. But equal.

[Laharl]

Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional?

So, we'll just give them a seperate word. Seperate. But equal.

How about we don't pretend that it's equal, but do allow certain rights? Tax reductions, visiting rights in hospitals? I don't know if there is anyone who really thinks that is a bad idea. Legality to adopt children? Well... I can argue this one. In my exceedingly non-humble opinion, if your relationship on a biological level cannot EVER produce children even if all the bits and pieces there are fully functional, you shouldn't be raising kids. It's not as simple as "you can't make it, you can't raise it" because there's always extenuating circumstances for certain exceptions to a rule like that (such as a guy being sterile or a woman being barren). Man on man? Can NEVER produce a child, regardless of how healthy both are. Same with woman on woman.

Saying it's equal would be false, and probably one of the reasons that no middle ground has been reached. I'm in favor of a compromise.