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.
It would have to be Tennessee, where it's OK to marry your sister, but not your boyfriend!
Now wait. I am from Tennessee, and I support an individuals right to marry whomever they like for whatever reason they like.
This was a county judge, in a rural area, and of course thats what he is going to do. There was a lady who was told by a judge she couldn't name her child Jesus last year in this state. There are many backwards places, and many places are just where all of the young people left, and all you have left is a old group of christian conservatives, even as elected judges. Thats what this is here.
It is not the whole state, its no more the whole state then in rural New York State, where you'll find similar feelings towards gay marriage. We just don't have New York City to balance out the left right.
My state is not backwards, we are slow to change. Thats not always a bad thing. This issue should really be settled at the federal level.
Roane County Circuit Judge Russell E. Simmons Jr. (right) ruled that Tennessee’s same-sex marriage ban is "rationally related to state interests" and therefore does not violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause.
Finally common sense re-emerges. The state has a vested interest in promoting traditional families. In fact many countries do that as part of their strategic planning.
That was settled back in 1967 when the Supreme Court ruled that states could not ban inter-racial marriages.
And this is the sticking point, and its why the supreme court has avoided the question.
If homosexuality is a choice, not something you are born with, then yes the state and federal government can prevent you from doing that. Just like they can prevent you from marrying your sister legally.
However, if homosexuality is not a choice, and is the result of genetics and external hormones and environmental conditions, beyond their control, that make them gay, then it does fall under the same rulings as banning interracial marriage.
Thats the point. Is it natural, or unnatural. One way it has to be legal, the other it does not. The Supreme court does not want to make that decision, and its why they keep putting it off.
That was settled back in 1967 when the Supreme Court ruled that states could not ban inter-racial marriages.
It will be settled if they make the same decision on same sex marriage. Now I ask you, if SCOTUS does rule for gay marriage, what if states refuse to obey? There are some that would. Are they willing to risk a constitutional crisis for a tiny group like the gays? Just how important do you imagine the gays really are to this nation? Do you imagine gays are a cause that people will die for like slavery?
Finally common sense re-emerges. The state has a vested interest in promoting traditional families. In fact many countries do that as part of their strategic planning.
What is the common sense item here?
Seems to me that if you want healthy, happy, children you may want to ban traditional marriage in favor of same sex.
The state has a vested interest in promoting traditional families. In fact many countries do that as part of their strategic planning.
What exactly has Tennessee done - what legislation - to "promote traditional families" as opposed to banning gay marriage because, you know, banning gay marriage will lead to fewer unwed moms and more straight kids getting married and having more church sanctified unprotected procreation purpose sex.
It will be settled if they make the same decision on same sex marriage. Now I ask you, if SCOTUS does rule for gay marriage, what if states refuse to obey? There are some that would. Are they willing to risk a constitutional crisis for a tiny group like the gays? Just how important do you imagine the gays really are to this nation? Do you imagine gays are a cause that people will die for like slavery?
I think what's sadder is you have such miserable people filled with hate, they would rather nit pick and control others lives instead of allowing people to be happy in their own way.
This is what happens when you let governments decided who can or can't marry. Remove all benefits from Marriage and will no reason to marry. Marriage is nothing more then a legal rights with a title you can get those just by signing a legal agreement which has nothing to do with the procreation and or stability. IE if I want my lover, friend, parents, children and who my neighbor to have rights to see me in the hositipal or death bed and or any other legal rights to my life, children etc I can get that done in whats called common LAW!! Common law of rights are accepted in all states and federal law between 2 or more ADULTS!! Applying for marriage certs is where you get yourself into religious and or other issues that have some magic wand for legal rights. Which I also find STUPID anyway.
As far as the constitutional aspect of this TN has the right as per the 10th amendment end of story.
People need to start thinking COMMON law with the benefits of marriage without the title.
There should be no marriage benefit, insurance benefit and or any other benefit of being married. This is just creating government discounts for something the government then wants to regulate and call it only for X or Y groups but not others.
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.
