Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-14-2013, 04:54 PM
 
Location: Fort Myers Fl
2,305 posts, read 3,022,493 times
Reputation: 921

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike0618 View Post
The religious marrage and the goverment marrage get confused as the same thing. Jews have 2 marrages theres a religious one and a goverment one. It is possible to only do the goverment one. The same with devorce, you can be legally goverment devorced but still married by jewish law.

I see no problem with gays getting a goverment marrage but it should be up to the religious organization if they want to do a religious marrage.

So my conservative answer is that a goverment has a right to define what a goverment marrage is but should never mandate that any religious person be required to marry any couple for any reason.
And that's the way marriage should be, a religious thing. That way if it's cool for two men to get married according to your religious belief then get married.

Why does the government even need to be involved? Oh yea, so they can get some money from you.

 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:15 PM
 
14,917 posts, read 13,070,046 times
Reputation: 4828
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
I used to live in a small town with a few liberal activists, who were insufferably smug. At our annual summer festival (two weeks before labor day), he (the librarian) was off yammering at the Republican Women's tent, being his usual obnoxious self. I was picking through the tables of books for sale from the library right next to their booth and finally got tired of his screed.

He was going on about how "gay marriage" was a right just as I turned around. I said "no, it's not a right".

"YEs it is".

"No, it isn't. If marriage were a right, the state would have no say in who can get married - just like it can't decide who gets free speech and who doesn't". But you're not trying to make it a right, you just want to change who the state says is allowed and who isn't."

The guy stood there for a while, unable to find any response, while the old ladies at the booth snickered at him, and finally he stormed off to the Democrat tent, presumably looking for a retort.

Which is true. Democrats no more believe in marriage as a right, than conservatives do. They just disagree on WHO gets married.

When Democrats insist that ANYONE and EVERYONE can can get married, including siblings and other unsavory combinations, with the blessings of the state, THEN they can claim marriage is a right. Until then, they're just trying to demagogue the issue, making accusations of discrimination. Well, of course, marriage IS discrimination. After all, we deny it to lots and lots situations, and liberals generally support that idea.
Marriage most certainly is a right - it's a legal right. All 50 states have crafted marriage laws, and has such, have make it a legal right (or more accurately, it confers a collection of legal rights).

We also have a Constitution that says all people are to be treated equally under the laws of the several states. In that context, access to state marriage law (and the legal rights it confers) is a civil right.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:18 PM
 
9,240 posts, read 9,713,124 times
Reputation: 3315
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebigr View Post
And that's the way marriage should be, a religious thing. That way if it's cool for two men to get married according to your religious belief then get married.

Why does the government even need to be involved? Oh yea, so they can get some money from you.
When you divorce, you need the court to decide how much money you get.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:30 PM
 
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA
2,309 posts, read 4,370,381 times
Reputation: 5355
Quote:
Originally Posted by pnwmdk View Post
Can you answer the question? Why do gay people need to marry?
In my opinion gay people need to marry in order to feel as equal, as valued and as religiously bound to one another as married straight people do if it is their wish to involve their religious beliefs.
When two people wish to legally commit themselves to one another in the eyes of their God, it is their right in which to do so.

Citizens in other cultures become legally bound to one another within the confines of their religion which is differs from the Judeo Christian views concerning what their God represents.

I'm a straight, 2nd amendment , pro militarization of the southern border guy who happens to love and support my sister who is a lesbian and is married to her wife of four years and counting.
Her and her wife's political leanings make mine look like Noam Chomskys.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:36 PM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,950,203 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by garnetpalmetto View Post
When your reasoning is based wholly on a false premise, little rebuttal is actually needed. Your meandering and occasionally not wholly fleshed out vignette aside, the upshot of your statement is that marriage isn't a right because the state has a say in who gets married and who doesn't. That argument fails on two tests.
Yours below fails completely.

Quote:
First, the government does have a say in who gets to partake in certain rights when there's a compelling interest in restricting the practice of those rights.
They are not rights, if the government can deprive you of them at whim. The only way a person can have rights taken, is by due process of law. If it's a right, and the government is depriving of that right, then the government is wrong.

Quote:
Let's, for instance, take the right to bear arms. There are several categories of people who legally aren't allowed to enjoy the right to bear arms including convicted felons, fugitives, people adjudicated to be mentally incompetent, etc.
Notice how every one of these requires an individual adjudication to remove their right.

Quote:
Naturally, one can see the compelling interest in the restriction of the right to bear arms - but it's still a right to be enjoyed by all, assuming they don't fall on the wrong side of the state interest line.
No, because "state interest" is not a valid reason. It's within the government's interest to quell dissent over things it wants to do. Yet, that is not a reason to remove the right of free speech.

Quote:
Similarly, voting is a right, yet again, there are compelling state interests in play that restricts who can enjoy the right to vote. Just because the law says those under 18 cannot vote doesn't mean that voting isn't a right. Thus your argument fails once.
No, we have a solid principle that people under 18 are not "competent", and thus, their RIGHTS are under the control of their parents or guardians - they are not free, because they are under the control of someone else because of their age.

Quote:
Second, it fails on the face that marriage is a right. Multiple times the Supreme Court of the United States, the final arbiter of what is or isn't Constitutional, has ruled marriage to be a fundamental civil right, including in Loving v. Virginia, which the photo EmeraldCityWanderer posted referenced. Thus your argument fails twice.
I'm sorry, SCOTUS has made many stupid rulings. Just because it rules something doesn't change the reasoning or logic. Unless, of course, you have a compelling argument that our minds must be controlled by the men in robes.

Quote:
Now then, is there a compelling interest in restricting who can practice marriage? In some cases, yes - once again, age is one. The government feels that those too closely related shouldn't enjoy the rights of marriage for the public health rationale. But what is the compelling interest in barring same sex marriage? I personally see none and repeatedly in courts advocates of same-sex marriage bans have been unable to voice what that interest is.
Then it isn't a right. Because government has no legitimate reason, EVER to deprive anyone of an individual right without due process.

Quote:
But to answer your point, as mistaken as it may be, marriage is a right and the restriction of a right by a state government or federal government doesn't mean that something suddenly isn't a right.
Well, you failed all the above, and that leaves this a baseless assertion.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:39 PM
 
5,762 posts, read 11,610,828 times
Reputation: 3869
A "right" is a social construct; it has no basis in reality aside from what human societies choose to grant. To put it another way, what "natural rights" do you have if you are alone in a raft in the ocean? Do you have a "right to life?" How would you exert that particular right? Rights language is only meaningful to the extent that we choose to make it so.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:39 PM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,950,203 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7 View Post
For any of the many reasons why straight people get married:


Show of legal commitment. Economic reasons. Protection of property. To have legal status to make health decisions for one another and not have family members interfere. To create a home together. To start a family together "in wed lock." Because they're in love. To "make it official."


Gays, like straights, have a multitude of reasons why they choose to marry... or choose to NOT marry.


Why is this difficult for you to grasp?
I grasp things very well.

Now explain to me why three women have a compelling interest to get married but it should be denied.

Or, siblings.

Please use the reasoning you gave above in support of your answer.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:40 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
33,511 posts, read 37,039,582 times
Reputation: 13978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bettafish View Post
When you divorce, you need the court to decide how much money you get.
No you don't.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:40 PM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,950,203 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by tablemtn View Post
A "right" is a social construct; it has no basis in reality aside from what human societies choose to grant. To put it another way, what "natural rights" do you have if you are alone in a raft in the ocean? Do you have a "right to life?" How would you exert that particular right? Rights language is only meaningful to the extent that we choose to make it so.
Yes, you have a right to life. Explain why you think you do not.
 
Old 11-14-2013, 05:43 PM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,950,203 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by julian17033 View Post
In my opinion gay people need to marry in order to feel as equal, as valued and as religiously bound to one another as married straight people do if it is their wish to involve their religious beliefs.
When two people wish to legally commit themselves to one another in the eyes of their God, it is their right in which to do so.
This requires NO recognition on the part of the state to do. Everyone has ALWAYS been free to have any ceremony they want. It's STATE RECOGNITION that we're discussing.

Quote:
Citizens in other cultures become legally bound to one another within the confines of their religion which is differs from the Judeo Christian views concerning what their God represents.
We're not discussing religion, or anything based on religion.

Quote:
I'm a straight, 2nd amendment , pro militarization of the southern border guy who happens to love and support my sister who is a lesbian and is married to her wife of four years and counting.
Her and her wife's political leanings make mine look like Noam Chomskys.
I'm not comparing rulers or anything else. I'm asking people to defend their arguments.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top