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.
Regardless of one's personal beliefs and or views those against SSM will simply need to get over it. The die has been cast and surely as night follows day in say ten years (or less) SSM will be legal in every US state.
The Kennedy/majority SCOTUS ruling on DOMA gave those seeking to challenge state laws and or constitutional bans on "gay marriage" ample reason to challenge and judges looking to over turn great leeway. Gays and their supporters stated after the DOMA and Prop 8 decisions they would waste no time or effort in attacking various such state restrictions, and they haven't.
The same attorneys that represented challenge to Prop 8 specifically announced they would look to bring other cases in states that ban gay marriage, and Virginia was next which they prevailed as well.
Utah, Kentucky, Texas, etc.... all states persons assumed would be *safe* *will* have gay marriage. This means Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and the rest aren't far behind.
At this point the SCOTUS need do nothing if lower appeal courts uphold rulings striking down state bans on "gay marriage". If they do this the first cases likely to reach them (Ohio, Virginia, etc...) then that will send a powerful signal. In short order the remaining states will see challenges and that will be that.
Cannot see with the current make-up of the SCOTUS anyone on the majority side switching their opinion unless there is a powerful reason. Roberts et al can bluster and whatever all they want, but there isn't anything they can do.
The only way the court *might* be swayed is if a strong enough case could be made for state's rights, and or the principle that the SCOTUS does not have the power to tell states what to do among a few things. That or they perceive the backlash will be so great as with other "hot button" social issues such as abortion and discrimination based upon race or gender that the issue of SSM is constantly being tested or whatever.
One issue that will come up and needs to be sorted is can states or the federal government force persons to perform and or otherwise become involved in gay marriage if it violates their religious beliefs or other principles. This may be decided by the SCOTUS quite soon as they are gearing up to hear challenges to Obamacare by religious groups regarding the birth control mandate.
Finally the other reason why you cannot unring that bell is gays couldn't have asked for a more perfect administration than Obama. By the time the man leaves office in 2016 most of their gains will be cemented in law, executive orders, memos, rule changes and so forth. While anything besides laws can be rewritten at once by a new administration that would seem petty and ugly. Thus you probably wouldn't see it happening regardless of whom wins the next election.
Originally Posted by CousinMaynard i'd never want to make it seem like one's location should exclude their right to participation.
but then again, i also think one has the duty to be completely honest and self critical before proclaiming their own perceived righteousness.
in other words, i find it disturbing that a country where the age of sexual consent is 14 years of age, and a country where sexual predators prey on young girls with impunity, would be portrayed as some kind of example to be followed.
I will ask these questions AGAIN since they have not been answered for YEARS ...
What "special" rights are same-sex couples asking for?
What changes in YOUR marriage if same-sex marriages become legal on a State or Federal level?
they aren't asking for any rights at all. they are asking for a license and the privilege that comes with it.
we here in california decided it was not in our best interest to grant them marriage licenses. luckily for those on the side of injustice, political and judicial tyrannts conspired to mute the will of the people. democracy was undone, and much hollow celebration was to be had.
And that aspect of hollowness cant be addressed enough, take it from someone who grew up in the bay area. The revenge the homosexual offenders (Corinthians 6:9-10) wish to force on the rest of us is fueled by their lack of acceptance back home. to have collectively gone thru uprooting their lives to establish san francisco as their stronghold, only to learn their carefully constructed chateau fort offers little real security must hurt more than if the status quo had remained.
Marriage rights are joint rights. They don't make sense in the context of single people. Specifically, what rights are you arguing single people are denied that they should get?
He wants the right to visit himself while he is in hospital and make medical decisions for himself while he is in a coma?
Ahem. The age of consent in Canada is actually 16, just like in New Jersey.
when i was there it was definitely 14. if it has changed to 16 it would still be too young but better none the less. and as i recall the age limit could be younger if both partners were young enough.
that still doesnt address the "freedoms" that the perverts/polygamists in bountiful b.c. and perhaps elsewhere are exploiting thanks to federal govt's granting of guay marriages.
Again, words are being put in my mouth. I dont mean marriage is mine. I mean marriage is ours in that government may only recognize, not re-define marriage, as it has never been theirs to re-define.
if one wants to argue that marriage did not develop from the family unit one could, but even then marriage was clearly defined by religion before any modern government was born. Separation of Church and State would then require that the government may in no way involve itself in changing the institution of Marriage at all, and may even make our government's recognition of marriage unconstitutional.
when modern governments recognized marriage, they required a marriage license. because just as the family unit and marriage were not available to all before government's involvement, the privilege of a govt. issued license defines that certain criteria must be met. there are no "rights" involved, rather an exchange of benefits. the government deemed marriage to potentially be to its own benefit, and in return provides benefits to those who qualify.
history has taught us polygamy is damaging to society
history has taught us incest must be discouraged
and science teaches us homosexuals can not form a family unit.
In regards to Corinthians, i only include book line and verse for reference because some are not familiar when i quote without them. My view on the sins had neither been solicited nor offered previously. If it were, i would simply refer to the very next line, Corinthians 6:11, which as I understand it, says that a sinner's soul will be redeemed if they correct their sinful behavior.
Oh please. YOU are not familiar with Paul's letter to the Corinthians if you think it has anything at all to do with gay and lesbian people. It was only in the 1940's that the word 'homosexuals' was used for the first time in a modern English version as a very poor translation of the Greek word 'arsenokoites'. Even funnier, is that the same verse was used for centuries to condemn masturbators not homosexuals.
Ironically, if you actually understood what Paul was writing, your self-righteous hypocritical 'reviling' and 'slandering' of gay and lesbian people means it is you who won't be 'inheriting the kingdom of god' like you think you will. Perhaps there is still time for you to correct your sinful behavior?
Also ironically, the father of your religion, Abraham, incestuously married his half sister Sarah, had sex with Sarah's slave Hagar, had several other wives (eg Keturah) and kept a bevy of concubines with whom he also had children. So using your Bible as a "moral" basis for marriage in the 21st century is completely ridiculous.
In any case, secular civil marriage has nothing to do with your misguided religious beliefs. Your religion does not own the word 'marriage'. If you want a religious 'marriage', then have a ceremony in a church and don't get a civil marriage license.
when i was there it was definitely 14. if it has changed to 16 it would still be too young but better none the less. and as i recall the age limit could be younger if both partners were young enough.
that still doesnt address the "freedoms" that the perverts/polygamists in bountiful b.c. and perhaps elsewhere are exploiting thanks to federal govt's granting of guay marriages.
Bountiful? You have similar FLDS enclaves all over the USA, still loyal to Warren Jeffs.
i'd never want to make it seem like one's location should exclude their right to participation.
but then again, i also think one has the duty to be completely honest and self critical before proclaiming their own perceived righteousness.
in other words, i find it disturbing that a country where the age of sexual consent is 14 years of age, and a country where sexual predators prey on young girls with impunity, would be portrayed as some kind of example to be followed.
The age of consent is 16. Hasn't been 14 since 2008. Here are the rules. Sounds perfectly fine to me. Age of consent in the states goes by state, as low as 14 and as high as 18.
They aren't asking for any rights at all. they are asking for a license and the privilege that comes with it.
I was referring to the anti same-sex marriage people who keep saying supporters of same-sex marriage want "special rights" which they are never able to list and allowing same-sex couples to wed will destroy their marriage ... again they are never able to say how unless their marriage is on such a weak foundation or they are insecure in their own sexuality.
Then they start talking about bestiality, incest, marrying an object, etc..
And other than in their twisted thoughts they can't make the connection there either.
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.
