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.
Do you feel the same way about interracial marriage? Should that have been left to the States?
Since the US Constitution doesn't address it and states that what it does not address is left to the states and the people it is the perogative of the states just as defining what a marriage is.
The US constitution with that pesky ol' "full faith and credit clause".....you know, the one means a man and woman who marry in NY and then move to TX don't have to get remarried just because they moved...the cluase that states the various states will recognize each other's actions:
Article IV, Section 1:
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
Sadistically, I fully support same-sex marriage, and, no, I'm not a divorce attorney!
It's a fact that there's no unity amongst any group of people, and I'd guess that most of the heterosexuals have falsely concluded that all Gay people support this measure. Not so! A lesbian Hawaiian state legislator cast her vote against it! I'm Gay, and you couldn't get me to any altar with a gun pointed to my head!
But let those that want that option, have it, and if they want to do stupid, then do stupid!
I will never understand why your rights to these things are such a threat to some straight people. I wish someone could explain it to me. Because as it is, the only reason I can come up with is they DO NOT LIKE YOU. They can tiptoe around the issue, talk about states rights, but when it comes down to it not one thing you are asking for hurts them in any way.
I am not in the least bit threatened by inheritance issues, hospital visitation rights, etc. If you want to leave your estate to your same-sex partner, or your cat, or the ACLU, or the Daughters of the American Revolution, it's no skin off my nose.
What I object to is the co-opting of the sacrament of marriage, as a God-ordained union of one man and one woman, and trying to make it something that it was never created to be. Call it a partnership, call it a civil union, or whatever. But marriage was created by God, not the government, and He gets to decide what it does and does not entail. THAT is why so many people object to gay "marriage."
I am not in the least bit threatened by inheritance issues, hospital visitation rights, etc. If you want to leave your estate to your same-sex partner, or your cat, or the ACLU, or the Daughters of the American Revolution, it's no skin off my nose.
What I object to is the co-opting of the sacrament of marriage, as a God-ordained union of one man and one woman, and trying to make it something that it was never created to be. Call it a partnership, call it a civil union, or whatever. But marriage was created by God, not the government, and He gets to decide what it does and does not entail. THAT is why so many people object to gay "marriage."
LOL, Funny! although I think many will not catch on to your sarcasm,
Since the US Constitution doesn't address it and states that what it does not address is left to the states and the people it is the perogative of the states just as defining what a marriage is.
The Constitution of the United States does address it - in the Equal Protection Clause of Amendment XIV.
The fact that the Constitution does not contain the word marriage is no more material than the fact the books are never specifically referenced in regards to free speech, or that Amendment II never specifically mentions Glocks or even firearms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PesachSeder
The US constitution with that pesky ol' "full faith and credit clause".....you know, the one means a man and woman who marry in NY and then move to TX don't have to get remarried just because they moved...the cluase that states the various states will recognize each other's actions:
Article IV, Section 1:
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.
Actually, the Full Faith And Credit Clause has never been held to require a state to recognize marriages from other states of a sort that the state in question does not permit. This is because FF&CC has long been held to apply to judicial proceedings, of which marriage is not (interestingly, though, divorce is a judicial proceeding, so states have long been required to recognized divorces performed in other states).
Here's a discussion of the matter by a Yale law professor:
Quote:
Longstanding precedent from around the country holds that a state need not recognize a marriage entered into in another state with different marriage laws if those laws are contrary to strongly held local public policy. The "public policy doctrine," almost as old as this country's legal system, has been applied to foreign marriages between first cousins, persons too recently divorced, persons of different races, and persons under the age of consent. The granting of a marriage license has always been treated differently than a court award, which is indeed entitled to full interstate recognition. Court judgments are entitled to full faith and credit but historically very little interstate recognition has been given to licenses.
As an example (as implied above), before the United States Supreme Court forced Texas (and 15 other states, in 1967) to grant marriage licenses to interracial couples, Texas was free to disregard the marriage of, say, a black man and a white woman who were married in the neighboring state of New Mexico.
And so it is now - Texas can ignore the marriages of same-sex couples married in other states. Of course, it is obvious that the time is coming, and coming soon, when Texas will be compelled to recognize same-sex marriages wherever they occur.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man
I am not in the least bit threatened by inheritance issues, hospital visitation rights, etc. If you want to leave your estate to your same-sex partner, or your cat, or the ACLU, or the Daughters of the American Revolution, it's no skin off my nose.
What I object to is the co-opting of the sacrament of marriage, as a God-ordained union of one man and one woman, and trying to make it something that it was never created to be. Call it a partnership, call it a civil union, or whatever. But marriage was created by God, not the government, and He gets to decide what it does and does not entail. THAT is why so many people object to gay "marriage."
And what you need to understand that a civil marriage is not a religious act of any sort.
I'm a man married to a woman, and there was absolutely nothing religious about our marriage. It did not occur in a church. No religious figure presided. There was no invocation of any deity or any the vaguest suggestion of anything religious or even spiritual.
Just because you put a religious emphasis on the act of marriage no more makes a civil marriage inherently religious than the fact that some people creating a religious ritual out of drinking wine makes my having a glass of merlot a religious act.
Aside from that, some churches happily marry gays - so your insistence that the law be tailored not merely to religion but to your interpretation of your religion is utterly self-absorbed and narcissistic. Get over yourself.
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.
