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.
Words evolve with the culture.
Marriage in this country has changed many times, are you upset at those changes too?
Well I gotta get to some responsibilities and glad I saw this one before I get going. Oh and your post above is not fair because you missed my complaint that the benefits if put in motion, would then create a penalty for those who live alone or are with a family person, raising youngsters. This would be discrimination. Anyway...everyone has their opinion, oh and no I'm in good spirits today, not upset and would never let something like this bother me at all.
Well I gotta get to some responsibilities and glad I saw this one before I get going. Oh and your post above is not fair because you missed my complaint that the benefits if put in motion, would then create a penalty for those who live alone or are with a family person, raising youngsters. This would be discrimination. Anyway...everyone has their opinion, oh and no I'm in good spirits today, not upset and would never let something like this bother me at all.
It is not discrimination, if they have the option to get married.
It is only discrimination if they are not allowed to get married.
The government CAN discriminate if it can show compelling state interest.
In three sentences I blew apart your "discrimination" theory.
When did marriage in this country change many times? How? As far as I can see, marriage has been from it's beginning, one man and one woman.
The sex of the individuals entering into a marriage contract is just one criteria of many.
Over time marriage laws have dictated (and continue to dictate) the race, age, sex.
In other countries, interfaith marriage is also not allowed.
But as we can see, expanding the class of people allowed to enter into a marriage contract does not and never fundamentally change the rights, obligations and responsibilities of a marriage contract.
When blacks could marry whites, white-white and black-black marriages did not change their characteristics. When age of consent laws are shifted up and down, it does not affect the marriage contract.
And when same sex can marry each other (as demonstrated in many countries and states), the marriages of opposite sex participants are not changed or affected at all.
When did marriage in this country change many times? How? As far as I can see, marriage has been from it's beginning, one man and one woman.
The race restriction was removed in 1967.
Some states allow marriage between first cousins, and most recognize those marriages if performed in states where legal.
Marriage used to allow rape of the wife until that became illegal.
Marriage used to be allowed with children as young as 13 not too long ago.
Marriage changes constantly.
YOU still haven't shown ONE example of how SSM affects society negatively. There should be plenty of examples, since SSM has been legal for over a decade in some countries.
In all of those examples marriage has always included both sexes. Only now it will exclude on of the genders. That is the difference and it is a huge difference.
In all of those examples marriage has always included both sexes. Only now it will exclude on of the genders. That is the difference and it is a huge difference.
So was the race restriction at one time. People got over it. And people will get over the gender restriction being lifted too.
Quote:
1) First, judges claimed that marriage belonged under the control of the states rather than the federal government.
2) Second, they began to define and label all interracial relationships (even longstanding, deeply committed ones) as illicit sex rather than marriage.
3) Third, they insisted that interracial marriage was contrary to God's will, and
4) Fourth, they declared, over and over again, that interracial marriage was somehow "unnatural."
On this fourth point--the supposed "unnaturality" of interracial marriage--judges formed a virtual chorus. Here, for example, is the declaration that the Supreme Court of Virginia used to invalidate a marriage between a black man and a white woman in 1878:
The purity of public morals," the court declared, "the moral and physical development of both races….require that they should be kept distinct and separate… that connections and alliances so unnatural that God and nature seem to forbid them, should be prohibited by positive law, and be subject to no evasion.
The fifth, and final, argument judges would use to justify miscegenation law was undoubtedly the most important; it used these claims that interracial marriage was unnatural and immoral to find a way around the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of "equal protection under the laws." How did judges do this? They insisted that because miscegenation laws punished both the black and white partners to an interracial marriage, they affected blacks and whites "equally." This argument, which is usually called the equal application claim, was hammered out in state supreme courts in the late 1870s, endorsed by the United States Supreme Court in 1882, and would be repeated by judges for the next 85 years.
Ya but this would be a new benefit then, and has nothing to do with the original reasoning for the incentive as an extra to begin with.. if you want to argue for this new benefit, reasoning will be needed which can justify the incentive or idea in its own contributing value...otherwise railroading a request for benefit becomes nothing more then a "just because" with no root independent meaning other then why not me..? So a reasoning is required to justify.
What new benefit? We want the same 1049 benefits. Not more, nor less than straight people are already getting. How can you not get it through your brain that is all we want. By giving us the SAME benefits, we become equal with straight couples. It takes none away from.
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.
