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.
Loving v. Virginia does not establish homosexual marriage as a civil right.
It establishes marriage as a fundamental right, and sets the precedent for same-sex marriage that has already been successfully used in the Federal courts.
More heterosexuals commit "sodomy" than gays. Maybe we should throwing all the perverted heterosexuals in prison. Of course, that's 90% of heterosexuals, so that might be a space issue in the prison system.
And just to add - I am a Christian who believes Jesus was a Jewish rabbi and is the Messiah - but I agree with you 100% on this topic! Keep it up, brother!
Under what criteria do you consider yourself Christian? You ignore his commands, you ignore the statements about not judging and you not escaping God's judgement, you ignore Jesus' attack of religious conservatives.
So how do you reconcile your views with Jesus' teachings? Jesus never condemned gays.
I love this where proponents of gay marriage constantly say that it should be no ones business what goes on with their private lives. If that's the case then, there should be no laws against taking illegal drugs, prostitution, polygomy, child porn, or bestiality, or even public drunkenness. But we do have these kinds of laws. The reason is that the evil nature of man must be restricted, or people will run wild and totally destroy fabric and structure of the nation.
So then we would be justified in restricting the rights of Fundie "Christians" right? They are evil, so we should ban their religious practice.
The majority decision also held that the intimate, adult consensual conduct at issue here was part of the liberty protected by the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment's due process protections. Holding that "the Texas statute furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual," the court struck down the anti-sodomy law as unconstitutional.
It establishes marriage as a fundamental right, and sets the precedent for same-sex marriage that has already been successfully used in the Federal courts.
It bases marriage as a fundamental right on the idea that marriage promotes procreation - something that homosexual relationships aren't exactly able to produce.
The majority decision also held that the intimate, adult consensual conduct at issue here was part of the liberty protected by the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment's due process protections. Holding that "the Texas statute furthers no legitimate state interest which can justify its intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual," the court struck down the anti-sodomy law as unconstitutional.
I really don't have a problem with Lawrence v. Texas. If a man wants to stick his penis up another man's butt, that is his perogative - who am I to judge what occurs in someones bedroom? That has nothing to do with marriage, however.
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.
