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.
Marriage laws are arbitrary. The people in the state decide who can marry, and who cannot. You just arrogantly think what is going on is legal, because the judicial outcomes on gay marriage agree with your own arbitrary views.
Every state has their own marriage laws, which deviate as to who may marry whom, they vary in ages, consent, and family relationship. they are all arbitrarily arrived upon by the voters in their states.
That depends on why the state is endorsing marriage in the first place. It depends on what definition, purpose and function of marriage is, according to the state.
If a state wants to rewrite marriage laws to say only couples with children will have their marriages endorsed by the state. It all depends on how the people in a state view the importance or purpose of marriage, not some simple majority on the court.
That would imply that the purpose and function of real estate has something to do with gender.
I'm not a religious person, the bible means nothing to me, so I'm not of that ilk.
The traditional marriage definition is about men and women making babies, and raising them in a family, so they grow up to be well adjusted and functioning contributions to society. This definition has nothing to do with eye, hair, or skin color.
And so does the state government.
That is not a good position to take.
How does having a gay couple with surrogate mothers not complicate matters? Every gay or lesbian couple that wants children must involve an outside party, and unless both gay men want the same surrogate mother, they may end up involving four people or more. Adding to the complexity, the children are always only related to one parent.
Or, all it takes is for some activist judge to decide a bisexual man can have two spouses, a man and a woman. Why can one person marry Tom, but another person cannot?
What is the difference if Tom and Scott are married to Susan, and she has their children, or they are in a gay marriage, and Susan still has all their children? In fact, wouldn't it be better for the children to be raised by their mother and fathers???
does it cause you pain and anguish if Scott, tom and Susan live together with their children??? Oh I forgot, you were busy waxing on about your arbitrary legal rational.
It's obvious that you have zero actual interest or knowledge of how the law works, or how scrutiny analysis works under the equal protection clause.
If you did, you wouldn't waste your time with the nonsensical posts, above.
It is literally a waste of my time to try to educate someone who completely ignores reality and hundreds of years of legal tradition in this country.
What a load of clap trap. The only point is that two adult men or two adult women do not have to live by your moral values. If two people of any sex want to dress up in leather and latex hang from a fan and put beer bottles up their rears its none of your or my business. Jezzzzz Louise you nuts will try t push your values off on others at the drop of a hat. Why don't you try to live your life by walking your walk and shut up? If your so correct and your way is so damn good then people will see how happy you are and maybe try to follow, but your pushing others into your thinking is not only dumb its not going to work ever.
Marriage laws are arbitrary. The people in the state decide who can marry, and who cannot. You just arrogantly think what is going on is legal, because the judicial outcomes on gay marriage agree with your own arbitrary views.
Every state has their own marriage laws, which deviate as to who may marry whom, they vary in ages, consent, and family relationship. they are all arbitrarily arrived upon by the voters in their states.
That depends on why the state is endorsing marriage in the first place. It depends on what definition, purpose and function of marriage is, according to the state.
If a state wants to rewrite marriage laws to say only couples with children will have their marriages endorsed by the state. It all depends on how the people in a state view the importance or purpose of marriage, not some simple majority on the court.
That would imply that the purpose and function of real estate has something to do with gender.
I'm not a religious person, the bible means nothing to me, so I'm not of that ilk.
The traditional marriage definition is about men and women making babies, and raising them in a family, so they grow up to be well adjusted and functioning contributions to society. This definition has nothing to do with eye, hair, or skin color.
And so does the state government.
That is not a good position to take.
How does having a gay couple with surrogate mothers not complicate matters? Every gay or lesbian couple that wants children must involve an outside party, and unless both gay men want the same surrogate mother, they may end up involving four people or more. Adding to the complexity, the children are always only related to one parent.
Or, all it takes is for some activist judge to decide a bisexual man can have two spouses, a man and a woman. Why can one person marry Tom, but another person cannot?
What is the difference if Tom and Scott are married to Susan, and she has their children, or they are in a gay marriage, and Susan still has all their children? In fact, wouldn't it be better for the children to be raised by their mother and fathers???
does it cause you pain and anguish if Scott, tom and Susan live together with their children??? Oh I forgot, you were busy waxing on about your arbitrary legal rational.
State marriage laws do vary, however when residents of those states who do not meet the criteria and travel to another state to get married, the home state still recognizes the marriage do they not? There are some states that allow 1st cousins to marry. If they move away from those states is their marriage null and void?
No, it's based on nothing more then arbitrary personal opinions and ideology.
You clearly have not thought thru this subject at all.
Do you and your ilk think you know best what the definition of marriage shall be for the entire country? You are in favor of the few judges or political elites, deciding these issues for the rest of us? Whatever happened to representative form of government, where the people decide what is the best interest for society?
Whatever marriage law any judge comes up with, it will be arbitrary. What age limits will the judge decide are legal for gay marriage? Some states currently have different age limits for men and woman. Other states have a different minimum age requirement.
Will bisexual men be allowed to have a man and a woman, or will you force them to choose just one or the other, but not both?
Will it be legal for Sally to marry Tom, but nor for Susan to marry him also?
I could go on, but why? What is your arbitrary reasoning for your decision on these?
I'm glad gay marriage upsets you so much, I really am!
It's obvious that you have zero actual interest or knowledge of how the law works, or how scrutiny analysis works under the equal protection clause.
If you did, you wouldn't waste your time with the nonsensical posts, above.
It is literally a waste of my time to try to educate someone who completely ignores reality and hundreds of years of legal tradition in this country.
I see, so since you cannot debate in good faith, you claim it's just too beneath you. Being both pompous and ignorant are not good debate tactics on your part.
Honestly, it's getting harder to even bother with these threads, or to be angry with all the ignorance that so many people have against gays. First, they're dying out, or at the very least, being marginalized. It's almost hard not to feel sorry for them. Their narrow view of the world is changing so rapidly, and they neither have the intelligence nor the honesty to change with it. They're frightened, they're desperate and their scare-tactics and awful treatment of others is becoming increasingly unacceptable by a society that's leaving them behind. I sure wouldn't want to be in their shoes, but then again, I'm in no danger of that.
After Prop 8 and DOMA, everyone sees the writing on the wall. People are is still arguing as if Homosexuality is still illegal like the pre Stonewall days.
State marriage laws do vary, however when residents of those states who do not meet the criteria and travel to another state to get married, the home state still recognizes the marriage do they not? There are some states that allow 1st cousins to marry. If they move away from those states is their marriage null and void?
The point is that states do write their own marriage laws, based according how the people in that state define what marriage means to them, and how they want marriage laws to reflect the values of their communities.
If you want to argue that one state must adopt the same laws in another state, that is a completely different discussion.
I see, so since you cannot debate in good faith, you claim it's just too beneath you. Being both pompous and ignorant are not good debate tactics on your part.
Wrong.
I am simply done wasting my time with people who demonstrate either inability or unwillingness to grasp basic concepts that MUST be grasped for meaningful debate to happen. I laid out how the legal analysis should work in these issues, and you just take it in an entirely different direction, completely ignoring the way things work.
It's bad enough that most anti-gays confuse sex acts with sexual orientation in the first place. But when you start adding legal analysis to the mix, it's a recipe for a lot of wasted time I will never get back.
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.
