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.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,670,113 times
Reputation: 10256
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carolina_native
Like I said in an earlier post, this is a road we as a society have not traveled down yet and it is not known what the consequences of its effects will be.
You do not want to answer the question directly but it sounds as though you would deny marriage (a 'right', which is something that you are ENTITLED to and cannot be denied) to certain groups of consenting adults.
If you want to keep the issue between just two adults, then would you object to a marriage of people who are related to each other?
Do you support any barriers to a marriage or do you support marriage for all people?
New idea? Not so much. . .I am a baby boomer. When I was in college an Episcopal church near the University of Pennsylvania started marrying gay people. The has quietly spread over the decades. It's time for legal recognition. It's been time.
Gay marriage has been legal in some states for about 15 years. So we have a bit of experience with it and it has not had any noticeable effect except to improve the market for photographers and wedding planners in those states where it is legal.
Marriage is a commitment between two people. There's quite a difference between the legal structure of two-person marriage and polygamy. We would have to rewrite the entire codes, contractual laws and all. That is not the case with gay marriage. Furthermore, there is a long history of polygamy throughout human societies and most modern ones have moved past it because of the negative legal and social consequences. In most instances, it winds up being one wealthy man accumulating a harem, leaving the women in dependent situations and large groups of young men shunned from society because they're now viewed as competition. You only have to go to Utah to see this in action.
Incest has clear negative societal and personal impacts as well.
So you do support barriers to marriage? You support some restrictions to marriage. Why is it permissible to restrict a right to someone but not to others?
In Cogburns ruling, the lawsuit for the case was basically for a church that said they were being denied their freedom of religion to not being able to marry those they wanted to marry. How can the same case be brought before the same court but with some other religious group claiming their rights are being denied and not allowed to marry?
Your statement that "legal in some states for 15 years" is not accurate. Massachusetts legalized it 2004 by court ruling, and was the only state until I think Iowa and Vermont, New Hampshire, and Connecticut in 2008 - 2009. The vast majority have legalized (by court order) in 2013 and 2014. So we are looking at the majority of leglaized SSM rulings really within the past 1-2 years.
So you do support barriers to marriage? You support some restrictions to marriage. Why is it permissible to restrict a right to someone but not to others? .....
Amendment 1 placed a restriction on marriage. i.e. opposite genders only.
Courts have ruled this is unconstitutional.
Since you apparently support Amendment 1, then please answer your own questions. There are no other constitutional restrictions on marriage out there that I am aware of.
It is a civil right. Being married bestows ~134 rights by the state on the married couple ranging from rights of survivorship, property rights, tax advantages, beneficiary rights., etc.
Amendment 1 placed a restriction on marriage. i.e. opposite genders only.
Courts have ruled this is unconstitutional.
Since you apparently support Amendment 1, then please answer your own questions. There are no other constitutional restrictions on marriage out there that I am aware of.
Yes, I do support restrictions on marriage.
Now you answer, do you support restrictions on marriage? Just a simple yes or no.
It is a civil right. Being married bestows ~134 rights by the state on the married couple ranging from rights of survivorship, property rights, tax advantages, beneficiary rights., etc.
Marriage is a right?
Please show me where the Constitution says it is a right to be married.
How can marriage bans be upheld by courts in some states but not in others if it is a right? Why did SCOTUS not intervene immediately to clarify this issue?
Please show me where the Constitution says it is a right to be married.
How can marriage bans be upheld by courts in some states but not in others if it is a right? Why did SCOTUS not intervene immediately to clarify this issue?
The reason why the ban is illegal and immoral is clear: the government cannot discriminate in the basis of sexual orientation. That is a protected class due some level of heightened or elevated judicial scrutiny. Discrimination by the government on the basis of sexual orientation is illegal, or irrational as Justice Kennedy says. Prohibitions on Polygamous, adult-child, and incestuous activity are not subject to heightened scrutiny. In fact, countries with same-sex marriage tend to be some of the most anti polygamy and anti child marriage societies on the planet. When someone attempts to compare same sex relations with these wild analogies, they really reveal a dark age mindset and ignorance of constitutional law and modern Western values.
Now you answer, do you support restrictions on marriage? Just a simple yes or no.
Yes I do. Marriage between children (not responsible), biological such as siblings & 1st cousins, coerced & forced, etc. i.e. Obvious ones that anyone with any common sense would understand are not equivalent to allowing Gays and Lesbians to enjoy the same access to civil rights.
Marriage is a right? Please show me where the Constitution says it is a right to be married. How can marriage bans be upheld by courts in some states but not in others if it is a right? Why did SCOTUS not intervene immediately to clarify this issue?
- Marriage as a right? Easy answer, it should have been obvious to you. From the NC Constitution.
Sec. 6. Marriage.
Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.
This establishes Marriage as a "right" in NC. The courts have declared it unconstitutional.
You will have to ask the SCOTUS and the other states why they did what they did. I can only speak as someone who lives in NC. If you were trying to make a point, you failed at it.
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.
