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.
Because it is. Factually, it's an unequal application of the law. It discriminates based on age - specifically when a particular person being under 18 (or 17 or 16 in some states). And it's perfectly legal and Constitutional discrimination
Even Constitutional rights have their limits. Despite the 1st Amendment, you can't scream "fire" in a crowded building, call for a synagoge to be fire bombed, or repeadly call and call and call an ex-girlfiend if the calls are unwanted. Despite the 2nd amendment, I can't own a small nuclear device.
Likewise, the 14th Amendment has it's limits. Despite the 14th Amendment, laws can discriminate if doing so prevents a harm to the people. It would be unconstitutional for a law to ban Jews or homosexuals from driving, but it's perfectly fine for a law to ban the blind or the severely mentally retarded from driving. Why? - because allowing the blind or severely mentally retarded to drive would result in harm - namely people being killed and physically injured.
Not allowing pedophiles to marry children discriminates against pedophiles. That's just a fact. However, it's perfectly fine discrimination since it prevents a harm - namely children being raped and emotionally / psychologically traumatized.
To bring this to the issue at hand, even the anti gay-marriage folks who defend gay marriage bans in court don't use your ridiculous "it's not discrimination or unequal treatment" nonsense argument. Instead, they acknowledge that it is unequal treatment, and then try and argue that it's allowable, Constitutional discrimination since gay marriage is harmful. They tend to fail miserably.
Why don't you give it a try. How does gay marriage harm The People? It's been legal in our state of New York for coming up on a year. How have New Yorkers been harmed by gay marriage? It's been legal in Mass. for 8 years now. Over the last 8 years, how have residents of Mass. been harmed by gay marriage?
it's not discrimination or unequal treatment.
it's up to you to prove it is and so far I already disproved every sinlge one of your arguments.
in regards to the harms it's a separate discussion because I don't have to prove those until you prove there's discrimination
I repeat there's only 1 form of marriage so there is no concern of "separate but equal".
and there is equality because everyone can get married.
straight man <-> straight woman
straight man <-> gay woman
gay man <-> straight woman
gay man <-> gay woman
Can't wait to see these conservatives introduce a bill to prevent post-menopausal women from getting married. Seems legit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo980
Um, you do realize that some men & women can NEVER bear children, right? Sometimes it's just a matter of time, but there are conditions that will render a person 100% infertile no matter how hard they try... often it's a natural condition, other times it could be due to surgeries or disease. I know a girl who's had a complete hysterectomy and chemo for cervical cancer, so she can never produce children - she's only 35 and engaged currently, so should I tell her she shouldn't be allowed to marry?
Moot point anyway, since childbearing is not a prerequisite for marriage.
A civil or legal right is a privilege, benefit, protection, or responsibility arising from civil law. Civil laws confers civil, or legal, rights. Period. End of story.
Civil marriage law lets the spouse of a military member shop at the base commissary and base PX. That is a civil, or legal, right conferred by civil marriage law.
Civil marriage law allows one to sponsor a foreign spouse for American citizenship. That is a civil, or legal, right conferred by civil marriage law.
Under certain circumstances, civil marriage law allows for one to collect social security death benefits when a spouse dies. That is a civil, or legal, right conferred by civil marriage law.
(note these are all rights denied to gay couples even if legally married in a place like New York)
These are all rights that are created due to the crafting of civil marriage law. Why do you deny this?
it's not discrimination or unequal treatment.
it's up to you to prove it is and so far I already disproved every sinlge one of your arguments.
in regards to the harms it's a separate discussion because I don't have to prove those until you prove there's discrimination
I repeat there's only 1 form of marriage so there is no concern of "separate but equal".
and there is equality because everyone can get married.
straight man <-> straight woman
straight man <-> gay woman
gay man <-> straight woman
gay man <-> gay woman
Which would've been relevant if the ability to procreate was a pre-requisite for marriage.
Good grief! The ONLY reason we have marriage is because of procreation, otherwise we never would have progressed beyond "going steady".
We know where babies come from, hence the importance of marriage, so as not to have a nation of bastards, and struggling, single parents.
We just assume all men and women either can, or will make babies if they have sexual relationships, so all men and women fall under the umbrella of marriage.
We pressure couples who engage in sexual relationships to get married, in case the woman expectantly becomes pregnant and has a child. two Two gay men will not spontaeneously, and unexpectanly adopt a child against their wishes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinArmageddons
As it is not, and government recognition of marriage cares not whether or not you can make babies, the procreation argument when it comes to government recognition of homosexual marriage is irrelevant.
Once again, the people are the government, and the government is simply an expression of the will of the people. It's we the people that realize the vast importance of marriage. It is in the best interest of the nation that men and women in extended sexual relationships get married.
As has been said in these discussions before, if one million gay men live together in a sexual relationship, for months or years and then break up, it does not benefit nor harm the nation at all. Whether or not gay men get married, or not, is a non-issue. It does become a serious problem if millions of men and women have sexual relationships and then break up, because they will leave behind tens of thousands of bastard children, raised by a single parent.
The above reason is why we have government involved in marriage, because of the harmful effect of single parent families, who struggle to raise their children.
Civil laws confers civil, or legal, rights. Period. End of story.
Civil marriage law lets the spouse of a military member shop at the base commissary and base PX. That is a civil, or legal, right conferred by civil marriage law.
Civil marriage law allows one to sponsor a foreign spouse for American citizenship. That is a civil, or legal, right conferred by civil marriage law.
Under certain circumstances, civil marriage law allows for one to collect social security death benefits when a spouse dies. That is a civil, or legal, right conferred by civil marriage law.
(note these are all rights denied to gay couples even if legally married in a place like New York)
These are all rights that are created due to the crafting of civil marriage law. Why do you deny this?
the only thing that's denied in NY is freedom of religion. (better religious rights then made up rights for people that engage in harmful behavior)
if freedom of religion can be curtailed for the over all good then even according to someone STUPID enough to believe they're is a constitutional right to to perverts marrying each other it the reason to ban it is because of the freedom of religion infringements.
yes, it sounds absurd. But, when does the gay rights end? Look at the bully laws. If a gay person gets beat up all he has to do is cry hate crime. Nevermind that he was dressed in a thong provoking the straight person. gays want acceptance, but only towards them. If people want to stop offensive behavior and attitudes then they should address their own issues that offend others. Has a gay leader EVER stood up and addressed this? Until that happens then most citizens will brush off your gay rights position as another case of liberals/gays just shoving their ideals upon Christians.
I haven't seen a single one of the kids on the news who recently committed suicide for being bullied over being gay to wear a thong to school. Where on earth do you live?
And your posts reeks of blame the victim. Women who get raped were clearly dressing too provocatively and that should be addressed.
By your logic, Conservative Christians are extremely offensive, and people have every right to persecute them until they address their offensive behavior.
First off, there is a huge distinction between the private sphere and the public sphere. I'm talking about the public sphere - our governance under civil, secular laws. The anti-gay (mostly conservative Christians in the country) are attacking gays on both the private and public fronts. They not only want people in their private lives to reject and ostracize gays, they want gays to be treated unequally in public life - to be discriminated against under the law. That latter part - legal discrimination - is what I call shoving ideas upon people.
Dan Savage ranting against Christian literalists hypocrites at a private function is not shoving ideas upon people - it's him trying to persuade people to his cause. Likewise, preaching against homosexuals isn't shoving ideas upon people - it's trying to persuade people to your cause. Banning me from accessing civil marriage law based on your religious beliefs most certainly is shoving your ideas onto me. Gays aren't doing that. Gays are not trying to shove their ideas onto you via discriminatory laws. I have never once heard a gay person call for banning straight marriage, or banning Christians from marrying, or requiring people to get gay married, or requiring that people have gay sex, etc, etc, etc. Love me or hate me for being gay - while I'll try to convince you gay is great, in the end, I really don't care. Just treat me equally under the law.
And don't get me started on this heterosexual white male Christian victimhood garbage. Heterosexual white Christian males are far and away the most privileged group of people in America. You're not under attack. When heterosexuality is banned and subject to the death penalty, then come talk to me about being under attack - when Christians can be involuntarily committed to mental institutions for being discovered as Christians, then come talk to me about being under attack - when men are banned from being school teachers, then come talk to me about being under attack - when white people are banned from serving in the military, then come talk to me about being under attack (four examples of laws that applied to gay people at one time in this country).
ok, so it is ok to "persuade" others against their will? Your selective reasoning is noted. As far as being treated differently under the law??? Can you provide some specifics? If your presumption is correct then people would be asked whether they are gay or not. Perhaps there should be a label on a drivers license for "gay" or straight?
If we are indeed treating homosexuals differently, then we should stop. But, how do we know whether or not someone is homosexual? I don't see how policemen can enforce this discrimination against gay people without knowing who is gay.
So, tell me hammer... how can I tell whether a person is homosexual or not?
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.
Has a gay leader EVER stood up and addressed this? Until that happens then most citizens will brush off your gay rights position as another case of liberals/gays just shoving their ideals upon Christians. 
