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.
Exactly. Marriage in the Loving vs. Virginia case was and is between a man and a woman who happened to be of different races. Loving and Jeter, the interracial couple involved, still consist of the only coupling combination possible to be marriage which is a man and a woman nonetheless. The Loving vs. Virginia case refers to Virginia’s antimiscegenation statute, which banned inter-racial marriages, and did not address, infer or involve anything remotely regarding homosexuality or homosexual marriage. Homosexuality is a sexual proclivity, not a race or the racial discrimination issue that Loving vs. Virginia was and is.
JobZombie (like the username, btw), you claimed that the United States does not consider marriage a right. I cited Loving v. Virginia to show you that the Supreme Court disagreed with your opinion on that front almost 50 years ago. Marriage is a fundamental right.
You are correct that Loving does not directly speak to same sex marriage. As I pointed, out, there are courts that have said Lovingdoesn't apply. There are also courts that says that Loving does. There's a disagreement about this that will almost certainly be answered at some point by SCOTUS. However, it was you that claimed that marriage is not a right. Loving alone proves you exactly wrong on that claim.
An argument may go that since marriage is a fundamental civil right (see Loving), it is a violation of the Constitution to deny that right on the basis of protected classes, under the Fourteenth Amendment. Gender is a protected class. Same sex marriage bans deny the right to marriage on the basis of the gender of the other partner. Therefore, same sex marriage bans are unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Those people who were opposed to inter-racial marrigae were doing so out of racial bigotry. Strip away a person's race, and a man and woman having sex will still produce babies, who will then grow up to become our future generation. A man a woman who marry and have children are exactly the same as any other couple, no matter the race. Two men, no matter how much love each other, will never create a baby, hence the distinction between men and women, and same sex couples. It's really that simple.
Wapasha, procreating is not a requirement of marriage, never was. So the only reason for straights to oppose gay marriage is their religion, their morals, their political leaning or just to keep the rights of marriage to themselves. Gays live in committed relationships too, why should they not also get the same exact 1049 federal marriage rights as any straight person does. Why should these rights be restricted to the special marriages of straights and denied to gays and lesbians. It is not as if straights have perfect marriages and never divorce. Heck, people like you will even stop us from getting a divorce when we get married. Marriage is also not required to have children. We only want the same rights and opportunities you have, to marry the one we love and have that relationship honored and respected by the government with fair and equal taxation and inheritance laws, not a different set of laws that you straight people enact for us. That is oppression by the masses and it needs to stop.
You are correct that Loving does not directly speak to same sex marriage.
Right, it was about a racial discrimination. Marriage redefinitionsts so badly want to play the race card with homosexual marriage but are surprised, angered and frustrated when it doesn’t fly and nobody buys it.
So the only reason for straights to oppose gay marriage is their religion, their morals, their political leaning or just to keep the rights of marriage to themselves.
This is incorrect. Many people simply do not want marriage changed. Period. The marriage redefinitionists would be better served accepting and dealing with this on that unambiguous level rather than trying to read more into it that isn’t there and attacking, name calling, and labeling those of us in opposition to the redefinition of marriage.
Right, it was about a racial discrimination. Marriage redefinitionsts so badly want to play the race card with homosexual marriage but are surprised, angered and frustrated when it doesn’t fly and nobody buys it.
Actually, we're fine with the comparison. It's your side that gets angered and frustrated by it.
Right, it was about a racial discrimination. Marriage redefinitionsts so badly want to play the race card with homosexual marriage but are surprised, angered and frustrated when it doesn’t fly and nobody buys it.
We don't play the "race card". We're simply pointing out a direct LEGAL analogy. (remember, this debate is about whether government can ban a class of people - in this case homosexuals - from entering into civil marriage contracts. The debate has NOTHING to do with redefining religious or traditional marriage).
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,758,476 times
Reputation: 41381
I think the country realizes we have much much bigger fish to fry. Besides, if God wanted to strike us down for gay marriage he surely would have done it by now.
about the same percentage of people that voted for obama. All this does is offer solid proof that indeed most people you run into every day are absolute idiots..
Can't see why Americans should support gay marriage when most Americans don't support homosexuality in the first place.
It's called freedom of choice and respect for individual liberty. I guess you don't believe in those things. The good news is that a growing number of Americans obviously do believe in "live and let live".
If you don't like same-sex marriage, then don't marry someone of the same sex.
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.
