Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's an equal protection issue. The law is applied differently based on the sex of the participants
No, sexual orientation is not a protected class, confirmed by the Supreme Court ruling..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
It's an equal protection issue. The law is applied differently based on the sex of the participants
No, sexual orientation is not a protected class, confirmed by the Supreme Court ruling with the Boy Scouts of America lawsuit
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
Now the state can discriminate if the discrimination furthers some legit state purpose - but that is lacking in the context of gay marriage. The old excuses aren't flying anymore. See the more recent court decisions on this.
Federal courts do not outweigh Supreme Court rulings.. While you might be looking at a timeline to base your opinion, I'm basing mine on a top down.. Supreme Court rulings ALWAYS over rule federal ones, and the Supreme Court has SPECIFICALLY ruled that you could discriminate against gays..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
You are missing the overall point here. If you make civil unions the exact same as marriage, it's pointless nomenclature. If you leave them at all different, you're still violating the equal protection clause and the First Amendment as well.
But that's a secondary argument that can be had after gay marriage is legalized.
Again, there is no equal protection for sexual ORIENTATION.. Only SEX.. They are not the same.. And no one is denying someones first amendment either.. Who said gays cant say they are gay?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
And that definition violates the 14th amendment to the extent it refers to sex.
Again sex is not sexual orientation.. Stop confusing the two..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
You misread my comment. What it MEANS to anyone isn't something the government can do anything about.
Considering the government wrote the legal definition, then ONLY the government can do something about it..
i think you are mis-understanding my purpose here in order to defend something that isnt under attack.. I happen to think limiting gay marriage is unconstitutional, (yes, I reversed my position on this based upon reading legal arguments in support) but I think so based upon different grounds...The Constitution protectsion ones pursuit of happiness, and an argument could be made that marriage helps equate to happiness. This can only be legally true because the government created the definition of "marriage", and offers tax credits for being married..
The only alternative is to have the government get out of the marriage business completely (my prefernce).. Stop offering credits, stop defining marriage, stop setting policies to entice (or in the case of welfare, discourage) marriages from taking place..
But again, this does NOT mean gays are protected because they have a "sex" because if they did, then the Boy Scouts would have lost their claim for permission to discriminate.. They didnt...
The same justification CAN be used for polygamy, sure. I believe I've already acknowledged, and even supported it in this very thread. The question is: "IS this being used to justify polygamist marriage?"
To my knowledge, no, it's not. At least not yet, anyway. So, what's to discuss?
Gays at one point were "minorities" just like current poligamists.. If you are going to argue the LEGAL changes taking place, then you must review ALL of the ramifications of any changes made..
America is a Representative Republic for a reason. We are setup to protect the minorities in america, and since poligamists are minorities, and the SAME justification can be used, then you MUST look at the possible outcomes and discuss them as well prior to writing bad law..
Gays at one point were "minorities" just like current poligamists.. If you are going to argue the LEGAL changes taking place, then you must review ALL of the ramifications of any changes made..
America is a Representative Republic for a reason. We are setup to protect the minorities in america, and since poligamists are minorities, and the SAME justification can be used, then you MUST look at the possible outcomes and discuss them as well prior to writing bad law..
While I fully support my wife being able to find another woman and bringing her into our marriage, there's more to it than simply "Well, let's give them legal recognition too".
Mainly, we'd have to rewrite tax laws to include multiple spouse households. That, and inheritance rights (which can easily be fixed by writing a decent will) are the biggest barriers to poly marriage.
Outside of that, if all parties are consenting, then they should be able to do whatever they want with the relationionship within the bounds of the law.
please don't feed the trolls; their appetite is insatiable and all they do is get bigger and bigger. best to let them whither and die under a dark bridge.
1. Anyone can "sign the contract" under the same restrictions as everyone else. My wife and I both had to find someone of the opposite gender to join into contract with.
2. Based on this argument, your beef is not discrimination based on sexual preference. It's that you don't like the current system. So get your buds together and change the law.
All I ask is that someone actually show me how gay people are being targeted for discrimination.
Why is it up to me to go find some obscure case to support my statement against your silly arguments? You're the one making the dumb argument that supposedly innocent little homosexuals are being treated so horribly by big bad heteros.
This is getting old, Strel. You're smarter than this...I know you are.
Prior to passage of Prop 8 in CA, couples, irregardless of gender, were legally permitted to marry.
With the passage of Prop 8, same gender couples were no longer allowed to marry. Thus Prop 8 is discriminatory to same gender couples.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
