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.
I know what the Fourteenth Amendment says. You didn't need to quote it for me. I have a copy of the Constitution at my desk.
Homosexuals may be "persons or citizens" but they have no right to "marriage" under the Fourteenth Amendment, for reasons I stated, which you choose to ignore. The Fourteenth was never intended to grant a right (marriage) to a class of citizens for whom that privilege was never intended to apply. No one, in that day, would have even considered it. Period. The very idea is an abuse of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution (together) define our rights specifically. There are no other rights not specified in those documents. But some people are trying to claim they have rights that they do not have. They are inventing new rights nearly on a daily basis. A "right to home ownership." A "right to a living wage." A "right to a guaranteed income and certain standard of living." A "right to health care (that somebody else must pay for)." The list goes on.
The Declaration of Independence isn't a legal document. In fact the Constitution was written with basically no incorporation or use of the DoI.
The text of the Northwest Ordinance states in Article 3.:
Art. 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.
No, we are not a theocracy, we are a Representative Republic. Further, nobody advocates for a theocracy. However, we cannot ignore the role that Christianity played in the establishment of our nation and it's laws.
The founders were men of Faith (most were Calvinists in their theology). Their reliance on God is well established in their own writings. To deny this is to deny our history.
Yeah. when they said religion is necessary to good government they were wrong.
If Gay Marriage becomes the law, then we will also see the definition redefined again to allow Polygamy and even incest Marriages. Mark my words, it will happen. And people will try to justify and make those things to be '' normal '' too.
This is why I want the Government out of Marriage, just drop it entirely and have '' Civil Contracts '' instead, to gay and straight. This way Marriage is protected by religious and private means.
I know what the Fourteenth Amendment says. You didn't need to quote it for me. I have a copy of the Constitution at my desk.
Homosexuals may be "persons or citizens" but they have no right to "marriage" under the Fourteenth Amendment, for reasons I stated, which you choose to ignore. The Fourteenth was never intended to grant a right (marriage) to a class of citizens for whom that privilege was never intended to apply. No one, in that day, would have even considered it. Period. The very idea is an abuse of the Fourteenth Amendment.
You seem to believe that a section of the constitution has to have the word[marriage] in it to be able to equate that section's affirmed right to the word.
A section of an amendment, Article, or other provision of the Constituion is used by judges as legal reasoning to affirm rights not enumerated by the Constitution but recognized by the Constiution as existing [9th amendment].
It seems as you are forming a justification [or others have formed and you agree]not to accept judicial rulings affirming marriage rights based on the word marriage not being in the Constitution.
The Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution (together) define our rights specifically. There are no other rights not specified in those documents.
The DoI is a statement of war. It is not used[and has never been used ] in any official manor to affirm rights. It's a nice read, but has no standing in a court of law.
Take your pocket Constitution off your desk and read the 9th amendment real quick.
Do you really think there's any real chance it won't be legal everywhere in the country within 5-10 years? If not, why are you continuing to make such a big deal out of it?
It won't be legal. I fight it because it's the sanctification of an abomination.
Except that slavery was done against the person's will, ie the very definition of slavery! What does two consensual adults of the same sex getting married have anything to do with your failed example?
The products of their relationship is what is harmful to society. I hold the same opinion about the behaviors of straight people. I think Americans see this as a Civil Rights issue and think we're becoming a "better" society for it, but history has shown otherwise when it comes to the liberalization of norms.
Of course, no one bothered to mind my previous post about segregation not equaling gay "marriage," but I'm finding facts don't always get credit here at CD.
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.
