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.
People like you are just blind to the reality that full legalization of gay marriage means a drastic change in our culture and society, and that affects everyone. Obviously, this doesn't bother you since you think the Christian faith is all BS, but everyone is not like you. Personally, I don't want to see my local churches conducting gay marriages or gay pride parades. Would you want to see adultry pride parades? That's equivalent to how a Christian sees it.
I understand that if SSM were affirmed as a right, that would fundamental change this country. Your perspective is that would be harmful to the Nation. Yet give no example how it would harm YOU.
How does a couple in your town able to marry harm your faith? How does it effective you negatively personally?
Would a SSM cause you more or less harm than a coulple divorcing?
Would a SSM cause you more or less harm than a couple living together without being married?
Not even the same issue. Interracial marriages never violated the definition of marriage to begin with, hence why banning it was unconstitutional. Try again.
You really need to learn how the law works.
Loving V Virginia had nothing to do with the violation or non-violation of a definition. It did have quite a bit to do with equal protection of the laws.
You have it bass ackwards. The contract for marriage is to JOIN PROPERTY for the benefit of children of the marriage.
COMMON LAW MARRIAGE - One not solemnized in the ordinary way (i.e. ceremonial) but created by an agreement to marry, followed by cohabitation. A consummated agreement to marry between persons legally capable of making marriage contract, per verba de praesenti, followed by cohabitation...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P.277
People who are LEGALLY CAPABLE can contract a common law marriage.
Those who are incapable need government permission (license).
CURTESY - The estate to which by common law a man is entitled, on the death of his wife, in the lands or tenements of which she was seised in possession in fee-simple or in tail during her coverture, provided they have had lawful issue born alive which might have been capable of inheriting the estate.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 383
Translation from legalese:
On the death of the wife, if there were children born of the marriage, the widower could keep her property, and endow their children on his death.
BUT, if there were no children of the marriage, HER blood kin had a legitimate claim on HER property.
Restating, the purpose of a marriage is to JOIN PROPERTY of the parents for the benefit of children.
If no children came from the marriage, the JOINING can be dissolved.
You are using an outdated version from 25 years ago.
Try the most recent ninth edition Black'sLawDictionary:
marriage, n. (Bc) 1. The legal union of a couple as spouses. - The essentials of a valid marriage are (1) parties legally capable of contracting to marry, (2) mutual consent or agreement, and (3) an actual contracting in the form prescribed by law. Marriage has important consequences in many areas of the law, such as torts, criminal law, evidence, debtor-creditor relations, property, and contracts.
-Black’s Law Dictionary Ninth Edition 2009 Pg 1059
People like you are just blind to the reality that full legalization of gay marriage means a drastic change in our culture and society, and that affects everyone.
So did allowing interracial marriage, and women's suffrage, and so on. Previous culture/society resisted such radical changes, and yet once they came about, things were fine and the country was better off for it. Such is the case here.
I think we are talking about two very different things.
"No church is being forced to have a wedding ceremony" ..... YET
No ...... you are not fighting for Civil Marriage, because Civil Marriage is already the Law in all States - that needs to be the real battle for Rights.
Bakeries are being forced out of business
Florists are being forced out of business
Any and everybody who does not agree - needs to be "punished".
Activists want more than "Civil Marriage". I've long been an advocate of Equal Laws for all Americans, including our Gay Americans. I have a Lesbian Daughter who was forced out of her job in the State of Missouri due to "moral factors" under State Law, she finally left the State to escape the Bigotry. - I feel strongly about Equal Rights for Gay Amerians
BUT ..... I disagree with this current battle - which is deliberately designed to punish each and every citizen that disagrees with what has become known as the "Gay Agenda". This is very counter productive.
Bottom Line ....... "Marriage" in the USA has been a "Civil Union" (requiring a Civil License for legality) ever since I was married in the late 60's. The DOMA laws tried to make sure that our Gay Citizens did not have the same Rights as non Gays - that needs to go away and eventually, the Courts will do that. The pendulum has swung too far in the other direction ...... now it's all about a Punishment to those who disagree with a Gay couple. Destroy their lives, take away their business, Boycott them, Riot against them. Punish those who do not become Activists for the Gays and Lesbians. Acceptance is not enough anymore - it's become a very Bizarre Take-Over movement.
I can't agree with that, and I suspect that many other supporters of Equal Rights for all Americans, including the Gay/Lesbian Americans will also start to have doubts. Time to get back to basics and decide what is really important. Is it "Rights"? or is it "War" against the "other"?
It's important to decide which is more important.
So a baker in Denver breaks the State's anti-discrimination law by refusing a cake for a gay couple and claims it's because of his supposedly deeply held 'religious beliefs' - yet baked a cake for a dog wedding? Yet somehow it's the gay couple 'punishing' him? Riiiighhht.
No-one is 'forcing' anyone out of business. If business owners choose to break the law, then that's their choice. A bakery or florist is not a church -it's a business. A same-sex marriage is a civil marriage not a religious marriage.
No, the 14th DOES in fact apply to state laws, No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
STATES can not deny citizens within it's jurisdiction equal protection of the laws. States have protections that are called marriage. They can not deny those protections to anyone without showing how doing so would further a compelling state interest.
In fact EVERY marriage case since Loving V Virginia, including DOMA, prop 8, Utah, and OK all cite the 14th amendment. I trust the judges opinion on how the constitution more than your opinion, THEY are well versed in constitutional law.
Of course you trust the opinion of activist liberal judges making things up. That's why its in the federal courts now and not a clear cut case.
If gays want to go through Article V and pass an amendment like blacks and women had to for the 13th, 14th, and 19th, then let them try.
Gays have never been considered a "suspect class." Therefore, all that is needed is a "rational basis" for a law preventing gay marriage. That's a very easy standard to meet.
The Tenth Amendment allows individual states to define marriage however they wish.
Why do people keep insisting rights should be up to a vote? If its something that doesnt carry some affect across all of the people why does it need to be voted on. Its like going back to the nineteenth century and asking any southern state to vote on repealing slavery. Its not fair to try and determine the rights of gay people based on the feelings of majority heterosexual people, and youre an idiot for thinking it is. Btw what would your excuse be if you happened to live in a state where 65% of the population was gay and they had heterosexual marriage as illegal? Would you simply bow down because the majority has spoken? Would you claim child birth makes their marriage more sensible, even though loads of folks have children out of wedlock, get divorced while their children are still home, have babies by different daddies, get in a relationship but dont want kids, etc? Boy Id hate to be in your shoes then, and I really do want a response to my question, becquse while you might not even think its possible, 25 years ago Cobb county Ga didnt think it would go from 98% white to over 50% black, but its amazing how times can change...and how it looks for those who only thought with their self interests and not those of others.
Gay marriage is not a right, no more so than if a man having a right to marry multiple wives or marry his brother or sister. The definition of marriage does not allow either of these things, it violates no one's rights. The only options you have is to either try and change the definition of marriage, which will open up the door to all kinds of groups getting married (as by the same logic you are usin , they would be discriminated against), or create a new term for your relationship.
If it's a matter of equal benenefits than I agree, gay couples should have the same benefits as marriage.However this is not what you guys want, you want to violate the definition of marriage and the will of the people so you can push your lifestyle agenda onto everyone. The goal is to force people to accept your lifestyle, and if they disagree then you labeltthem bigots. Eventually you would start labeling religious centers such as churches, synagogues etc.. As hateful places because they don't support Gay marriage.
Btw, I wouldn't hold my breath on people supporting your '' cause ''. The fact is that the in the few states that allow gay marriage, the vast majority of those were overturned by corrupted judges and not by public voters because even in the most liberal states such as California (where public voters turned down gay marriage TWICE) there is not enough public support for Gay marriage. Hence why they have to use corrupt judges. If there was enough public support then you wouldn't need them. Eventually they are going to try it with the wrong state, and when they do they are going to face massive backlash from the people.
Also don't compare gay marriage to the struggles that black people faced. It's not even the same issue and it undermines their accomplishments.
So a baker in Denver breaks the State's anti-discrimination law by refusing a cake for a gay couple and claims it's because of his supposedly deeply held 'religious beliefs' - yet baked a cake for a dog wedding? Yet somehow it's the gay couple 'punishing' him? Riiiighhht.
The Equal Protection Clause does two things. First it applies the 1st 10 amendments to the states, which up until that point it had not done.
Second if applies all Federal equally across all states, mainly arising from the Dredd Scott ruling in which citizenship requirements were not applied equally to all (This is why Scott was returned to MO as a slave, since he was not deemed to be a Citizen while residing freely in IL).
What the 14th Amendment does not do, is apply State Laws across State Lines. Each State still has its own Sovereign right to make its own laws in accordance with Article I sections 8-11, and 9th and 10th Amendments. If it was intended to apply laws equally across state lines, all laws of all states would be required to be uniform to afford this. The language of the 14th Amendment does not in any respect supersede the 10th Amendment reserving rights not outlined in Article Sections 8-11 of powers given to the Federal Government or Forbidden by the States, are reserved by the states and People Respectively.
Since the regulation of Marriage is not a power delegated to the Federal Government, nor is it forbidden to the States, nor outlined in any other Amendment, that power is hence reserved by the States First IAW the 10th Amendment. Since the 14th Amendment applies ONLY Federal Laws equally among the States (including the Bill Of Rights) this does not violate the equal protection Clause of the 14th amendment.
You would have better luck using the 9th amendment in your argument but still be running into a conflict and tough sell with Article I section 11 and the 10th Amendment in the way, vice the 14th which really does not apply here according to intent.
Can you please describe how a state doing that violates the 14th Amendment. Section 1 is the only part that may apply, which mainly deals with citizenship, and the final clause stating it must apply its laws equally.
If the last clause is your argument, the counter of how it does not violate this is, Heterosexual persons are also not allowed to marry the same sex, hence the law is being applied equally to Homosexual persons who are also denied the same. I.e, A Heterosexual person has no more choice in who they can marry than a Homosexual person, both are equally restrained by the same age and sex requirements of who can be the spouse. Since this is applied equally to both (the 14th Amendment does not state it has to be liked in the manner, just that it has to be equal) these laws do not violate the 14th Amendment. Now if a state made differing requirements for Hetero and Homo sexual relationships, it would in fact violate equal protection.
Not even the same issue. Interracial marriages never violated the definition of marriage to begin with, hence why banning it was unconstitutional. Try again.
Of course it's the same issue. The definition of marriage in 41 states at one time excluded interracial marriages. The court ruled that defining marriage law in that manner was unconstitutional. Likewise, many states have defined marriage to exclude same-sex marriage. Defining marriage that was is unconstitutional in the exact same way defining marriage to exclude interracial marriages was unconstitutional.
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.
Yet somehow it's the gay couple 'punishing' him? Riiiighhht.
