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.
Actually yeah they will have to. Once the supreme court makes a ruling thats it...end game. Right now these cases have only reached state supreme courts, but once it hits the US supreme court they have the final say for all of the states. You might want to take government again. Our founding fathers put in stipulations in the constitution for the federal government to have final say because they believed that the general population would not make the best decisions...until devolution evolution has been completely fulfilled the states ultimately have to go by the decisions of the US supreme court...hence Brown vs. BOE and Rowe vs. Wade, none of the states wanted integration, but after the ruling they were forced, same goes for most states with abortion.
A lot of States wanted Integration and a lot of States wanted to Free The Slaves...That the reason for The Civil War.....
I just wanted to make sure that I had your argument correct...that those who disagree are basically ignorant, old, hateful, and full of fear. Those who are religious are out of step with modern times.
So tell me, where does one get their morals and values if not from religion?
Sorry, my values don't come from a book that tells me to kill my disobedient child.
DOMA may be overturned, but no state will be forced to allow gay marriages on their turf. The US Constitution doesn't allow it.
Some states might not perform same-sex marriages, but under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, states may be forced to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.
So, if a couple in Mississippi can't get married there, they can go to Iowa, get married and then return to Mississippi and their marriage will have to be recognized by the state.
A lot of States wanted Integration and a lot of States wanted to Free The Slaves...That the reason for The Civil War.....
Where are you learning your history..no states (as in the majority of their populations black and white) wanted integration. It was forced upon them by the federal government. And just so you know slavery was part of the Civil War but definitley not a main reason.
You know, what I've always found interesting was the fact that there seems to be a link between rejection of religion, or secularism, amongst a large portion of a given population and progressive thinking and legislature. In the case of same-sex marriage laws or civil unions, there is a definitive link between less religious countries and acceptance of homosexuality and same-sex laws. This is true in Belgium, Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, France, UK, Sweden, and Norway, among others.
The US on the other hand, is a bit of an anomaly, being one of the most developed and wealthy countries in the world, still is bound by anachronous and conservative Christian ideology - so ingrained into the cultural fabric of the country that it has a very real affect on same-sex legislature.
Self-righteous types who oppose same-sex marriage because their religion says it's wrong, and will go to extreme lengths to maintain the "sanctity" of marriage. This has less to do, I think, with preserving historically definitions of marriage, but rather is a result of hate, fear, and ignorance - all a direct result of biblical passage.
California, Maine, and Massachussetts all offer some kind of same-sex partnership laws. And with older, conservative generations being replaced by younger, more educated, and less religious young people, it's only a matter of time before every state recognizes same-sex unions.
Because quite frankly, as a gay man, I don't think it's the governments right to tell me who I can and can't marry. Whether I chose to be gay, or am biologically just attracted to other men, my personal life choices are just that, mine. And as a tax payer and contributer to society, I resent that a book written 2,000 years ago by men which led to a religion that I don't even subscribe to, is used as justification to deny me equal rights.
Yes, there will always be religious people who oppose same-sex marriage, but the time has come that religious fundamentalism (which so far has proved completely off base in every assertion and/or explanation it has given of...well, everything) step out of social issues and stay where it belongs, because social issues demand fair and balanced reason, and reason is something that religion is notoriously lacking.
It's funny how someone can rail against intolerance while practicing it at the same time.
I'm a conservative as it's truly supposed to be defined (that is, in the spirit of John Stuart Mill's classical liberalism). I'm a Christian, but I do not interpret the Bible literally, nor do I find it to be a factual historical record. "Christian conservatives" as you are accustomed to being victimized by--who get all the press, unfortunately--are not true conservatives. Conservative philosophy is supposed to be about limited government.
Which is why I don't think my religious beliefs have any bearing on what should or should not be legal. For me, it comes down to 2 questions: would this practice, if legal, trespass on my rights and would this practice, if legal, harm society as a whole?
I fail to see how a man marrying another man or a woman marrying another woman is anyone's business but their own. I have no rights in regards to who someone marries. And I cannot see how gay marriage would hurt society at large either because, again, who someone chooses to spend his or her life with causes no harm to anyone physically, economically or emotionally. Spiritually? I'm still undecided, but our spiritual health is outside the government's purview. That is our own to protect and nurture and should not be impacted by the private affairs of others.
So, as a Christian who is a conservative, my stance is as follows:
(1) Gay marriage should be legalized. For government to sanction marriage for heterosexuals and deny it to homosexuals is an abuse of power that exceeds the limits of its authority. On the secular side, marriage is simply a civilly contracted partnership that invokes certain responsibilities and bestows certain rights on the two people involved in said partnership. I can see no reason why the gender of either party should matter.
(2) Whether or not gay marriage is acceptable in the eyes of God is between those people who choose to enter the union and God. It's none of my, or anyone else's, business. If the rules of the Bible were to dictate what is legal or not legal, then there are a whole lot of activities that would suddenly become criminal and our crime rate would skyrocket (need I list them all?). This is not a theocracy. No one is bound by any Judeo-Christian principles except those that tend to be universally accepted by everyone, including agnostics and atheists, such as: Do not murder, do not rape, do not steal, and so forth; acts that infringe upon the rights and safety of others.
(3) There should be no war between science and religion. If logic and reason are applied, an acceptable spiritual philosophy can be derived from combining what science has taught us with what religion attempts to teach us. (But that's a whole other discussion.)
(4) My Christianity is irrelevant to my political stances because this is not a theocracy, nor should it be. You cannot claim to be "conservative", which believes in limited government, while also being a "theocrat" which believes in government having the authority to force religious laws upon the citizenry. They're contradictory stances. Besides, I have violated Christian doctrine, as has nearly every other practioner at some point in his or her life, but I do not think such transgressions should be illegal. We'd ALL be criminals if that were the case.
(5) Due to my belief in the free practice of religion, no church should be forced to consecrate any union. Whether or not a given church or religion chooses to recognize gay unions is up to them. But a church's blessing or lack thereof should have no bearing on whether or not those unions are legal and binding.
On the other hand, it is unfair to characterize everyone who opposes the legalization of gay marriage as religious fanatics or bigots. One should ask them what their specific reasons are before judging. If they start spewing vitriol about the Bible, then, yes, they are being theocratic and bigoted--which is their right, but not something I personally find particularly admirable. But I know of several people whose reasons are non-religious, one of whom has started to change his stance towards being in favor of its legalization instead of opposed. I was able to persuade him to reconsider his stance because I used logic and reason to discuss the matter rather than ranting, stereotyping, and bigotry.
I'll end this post by saying that I understand and sympathize with your anger. It's the same anger I feel when I hear and read that all conservatives and all Christians are racist, ignorant, etc. There are far too many stereotypes out there about far too many "groups" of people, mainly because there are people in said groups who do fit those stereotypes and who are much louder about expressing what they think than others. But that does not mean that those stereotypes apply to all.
I hope it helps you to know that not everyone of my religious denomination or political persuasion is standing in the way of you pursuing your own happiness as it is your right to do. People have the right to protest gay marriage within the confines of our laws, and people have the right to fight for its legalization within the confines of our laws.
Each side has a right to its views, to express them and to fight for them. I just hope that our side wins on this particular issue. I'm a purist when it comes to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, and there is nothing in either of those documents that should preclude gay marriage.
P.S. There are a lot more conservatives on your side than you think. We just don't get any press. I can assure you, based on my circle of friends here in Connecticut, I am not the only one who feels this way. We were quite satisfied when gay marriage was legalized in our state. There's way too much government in this state, so it was nice to see it butt out of at least one "private" issue.
But please, in your frustration and anger, do not demonize every Christian and every conservative because you assume they are opposed to you having the same marital opportunities that they enjoy. Such assumptions are intolerant and prejudicial in themselves. After all, California is portrayed as being one of the most liberal and least religious states in the United States (whether that is true or not is up to those who live there to decide; I can only comment on how they are portrayed here) and look at what happened with Proposition 8. That didn't go at all the way I thought it would.
That said, I wish you the best of luck in attaining your rights.
The South Left The Union Because Of The Anti=Slavery Movement In The North
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaShay87
Where are you learning your history..no states (as in the majority of their populations black and white) wanted integration. It was forced upon them by the federal government. And just so you know slavery was part of the Civil War but definitley not a main reason.
The south left the union because of the Anti-Slavery Movement in the North......And let's see some of the states were already "Integrated" as far as "Neighborhoods' "Schools" and so on...Not All White People Are Racist...Sorry.....
Some states might not perform same-sex marriages, but under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, states may be forced to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states.
So, if a couple in Mississippi can't get married there, they can go to Iowa, get married and then return to Mississippi and their marriage will have to be recognized by the state.
Fat Chance..."Full Faith And Credit Clause" Would have to go thur the Supreme Court and I would give it a Snow Ball In Hell Chance
The south left the union because of the Anti-Slavery Movement in the North......And let's see some of the states were already "Integrated" as far as "Neighborhoods' "Schools" and so on...Not All White People Are Racist...Sorry.....
There were a select few states and neighborhoods that were integrated..this much is true, but that does not mean that integration was what the majority wanted. And just so you can stop being judgemental about me I never said that all white people are racist, I never even mentioned race, that was you. I said that 'no one' wanted integration. So when using those terms it just means white now? 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.
Nice try , but no cigar my friend , "Homosexual Marriage" will never be honored in any "States" outside of the West & East Coasts. 
The South Left The Union Because Of The Anti=Slavery Movement In The North
The south left the union because of the Anti-Slavery Movement in the North......And let's see some of the states were already "Integrated" as far as "Neighborhoods' "Schools" and so on...Not All White People Are Racist...Sorry..... 
Fat Chance..."Full Faith And Credit Clause" Would have to go thur the Supreme Court and I would give it a Snow Ball In Hell Chance
