Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 51
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriagePage 3 of 13    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13)

Gay marriage has nothing to do with polygamy. Allowing gay marriage won't make the arguments for polygamy stronger or weaker.


That opinion conveniently ignores some very important facts, which I talked about in #48. If states could no longer refuse to allow same-sex marriages, what legitimate reason would they have to continue to ban polygamous ones? None.

And since when is it unconstitutional to ban polygamy? It certainly is not--some states agreed to ban it forever as a condition of being admitted to the U.S.


As to the Supreme Court forcing ALL states to enact gay marriage laws, there's no reason to. The current situation is, that ALL states must recognize marriages conducted legally in other states.


The Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution wasn't always interpreted to require each state to recognize any marriage performed in any other state. But that's how the Supreme Court interprets it now, and that led to the Defense of Marriage Act.

The DOMA lets states make laws which exempt them from that requirement, as to same-sex marriages. Most states have done that, but this administration is refusing to enforce an essential part of the DOMA. Its legal argument for doing that--on equal protection grounds--is weak.


As soon as religious people persuade the rest of us to add ANY of their beliefs and concepts into the government structure, they LOSE ALL RIGHT TO CONTROL THEM FROM THEIR RELIGIOUS VIEWPOINT. . . The religious of the world should take this into account before they demand any of their beliefs be codified


That's your opinion, but many of those beliefs are already codified. And that doesn't mean we live in a theocracy. Thousands of laws, including most criminal laws, enforce moral standards which religion sets out. It's not just coincidence that state laws make murder, theft, prostitution, etc. crimes.

The Supreme Court has made clear that the fact a law is ultimately based on a religious tenet about what's right or wrong doesn't violate the 1st Amendment Establishment Clause. It's also explained why absolute separation of church and state is not required or even possible, and why it would almost certainly violate the 1st Amendment's other guarantee of religious freedom--the Free Exercise Clause.
 Aeladya
Joined: 4/2/2010
Msg: 52
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 10:11:28 AM
Honestly I don't see what the big deal is. I'm glad that they can get married. Why shouldn't that be allowed? Because somewhere in a book that is supposedly written by someone who supposedly saw and heard from an almighty deity said that it's wrong? Because it was written in the constitution? Guess what? Those things are dated. Sure it wasn't allowed back then, but times have changed. If you don't like looking at it then guess what? Close your eyes and don't look. I don't understand why you think this is a big deal. The world has yet to end because of gay people.

They can't have kids? There are ways you know, and there are tons of kids out there that have no homes and are needing homes, so adoption is a great way to help those kids. Everyone should be allowed to be happy. Maybe it's because I was raised to be tolerant (I wasn't raised by my homophobic birth mother, mostly because she didn't want anything to do with me), maybe it's because I'm bisexual myself. The first time I heard about homosexuality I was a teenager. I remember there was this parade on TV and I asked my grandmother what it meant. She explained it to me, but I didn't care. I didn't think that being gay was such a big deal and I still don't. I've been told by various religious organizations that if I didn't stop my friends from being gay I would go to hell. Guess it's a good thing I'm not religious isn't it? Then again I was also told I would go to hell for watching anime.

Moral of the rant. You don't have to like it, but at least mind your own business. They aren't hurting you any, you just have to ignore it and move on. No one said you had to tolerate it, but you can at least just mind your own business and move on with your life. It doesn't concern you, it's not your life, just get over it and move on.
 Molly Maude
Joined: 9/11/2008
Msg: 53
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 12:30:26 PM
I agree with pretty much EVERYTHING Aeladya said ...

I didn't go her route to get there, of course ... everyone has his/her own history ... but the bottom line is:

"They aren't hurting you any ... just mind your own business ... it doesn't concern you, it's not your life, just get over it and move on!"

WELL SAID, Aeladya ...



P.S. ... with homosexuality or breast feeding or any of the other multitude of "issues" that might bother YOU ... if YOU don't like it ... put a bag over YOUR head!
 femaleconnection
Joined: 8/12/2010
Msg: 54
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 1:54:02 PM
Im glad to see this.

I have never understood why anyone would care if gays were able to marry. A gay couple should be able to marry, and add thier loved ones to thier health plans, just like anyone else. They should be able to legally name one another as next of kin etc...like any other couple. I see the laws against gay marriage the same as I saw the laws against blacks being able to do things legally...it is old thinking that needs to be tossed out.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 55
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:50:43 PM
I never understood why Matchlight and the homophobes could have any issue over gay marriage as it does not affect them in the least. The constitutional arguement is so bogus as to be laughable, and the insistence that US law is based on the Babbble is equally laughable were it not for the Theocrats like Palin and Bachmann and a few in these forums. Ya never hear from these homophobes on the subject of the other olde sodomy law prohibiting oral sex in many states, all shot down finally by the Supremes in 2003.

From what I have seen in the past and present, it appears those most malicious toward homosexuality, tend to also be the most insecure about their own sexuality, and in the case of Mississippi a bunch of hypocrites.
http://wonkette.com/448291/mississippi-wins-coveted-free-gay-porngod-google-search-prize
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 56
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 5:50:39 PM
EP...it's not so much that these peoples are homophobe's/islamaphobe's/racist's/bigot's/isolationist's....it's just that anyone who think's/feel's/behave's/look's differently than them...make's them uneasy and must be persecuted for their differences...plainly EP...it is ignorance in the belief sysem of the bigoted/racist..why else would gay marriage effect anyone other than a married gay couple.

Edit:

VVVV

The point is that morality and constitutionality are not necesarily the same things...and shame on those that cannot tell the difference.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 57
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 6:11:33 PM

No one said you had to tolerate it,


That's exactly what concocting a constitutional right to same-sex marriage would force the majority of people to do, in many if not most states. You obviously don't care about the right of all those millions to have their votes count. And that right IS fundamental. There's something very undemocratic about that.


The constitutional arguement is so bogus as to be laughable


That's your uninformed opinion, for what it's worth. What is laughable is your need to rely on personal slurs and unhinged accusations. You make a habit of hitting below the belt, and I know why. You can't make your points using just facts and reason.
 wvwaterfall
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 58
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 9:27:56 PM
Much as it pains me to do so, I feel compelled to rise to matchlight's defense. I've seen no evidence of homophobia on his part. Indeed, whatever his personal moral beliefs are remain a mystery to me.

Near as I can tell the only thing that matters to him is his interpretation of the Constitution, which if I understand correctly means any state is free to discriminate against any group they choose to free from any federal intervention.

Many of us feel strongly that certain things are simply right or wrong and that federal policies should reflect those values, regardless of whether or not the Constitution explicitly addresses the issue in question, but that's not a factor at all if you believe that the Constitution, strictly interpreted, is the only place to look for answers to questions that couldn't have even been conceived of a couple of centuries ago.

I'm among those who think gay marriage should be allowed and respected everywhere there are gay people who want to marry. I don't feel compelled to make a legal argument. It's just the right thing to do. I don't think it's anyone else's business who marries whom nor what any two married people do or don't do consensually behind closed doors.

But I also understand that there are those like matchlight who feel the answer to all questions lies within the constitution and the rest of us need not trouble ourselves with any more moral contemplation than that.

But I also acknowledge that there are those who worship their interpretation of them institution themwqy Christian zealtsmworshipmtheir interpretation of thembible n
 wvwaterfall
Joined: 1/17/2007
Msg: 59
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 9:32:59 PM
Please ignore my last paragraph above. For whatever reason I had no option to edit my post and clean it up.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 60
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/29/2011 11:45:40 PM
Near as I can tell the only thing that matters to him is his interpretation of the Constitution, which if I understand correctly means any state is free to discriminate against any group they choose to free from any federal intervention.


I appreciate your intellectual honesty. States can do that as long as they don't violate any part of the Constitution which limits them. How far a state can restrict a right depends on whether the right's fundamental, and on whether the state law makes any of several suspect or quasi-suspect classifications and disadvantages the persons included in them. Lots of laws treat similarly situated people differently--sometimes much differently, especially in economic matters--without denying them equal protection.

Many of us feel strongly that certain things are simply right or wrong and that federal policies should reflect those values, regardless of whether or not the Constitution explicitly addresses the issue in question, but that's not a factor at all if you believe that the Constitution, strictly interpreted, is the only place to look for answers to questions that couldn't have even been conceived of a couple of centuries ago.


A couple points. Moral indignation does not justify ignoring the Constitution. The federal government just does not have the authority a lot of people seem to imagine. It has NO general, innate power to make policies, like the states do. Any state is free to allow two people of the same sex to marry each other, if a majority of that state's voters wants to make that law. But I'm convinced nothing in the Constitution gives the federal government authority to compel any state to do that, where a majority opposes it.

To the extent the U.S. government ignores the Constitution, we are living under arbitrary rule--someone's whim--and not the rule of law. THAT is why it's so vital never to make any part of it mean what it clearly does not. When that happens, it undermines the freedoms of all of us.

When the Supreme Court in effect rewrites part of the Constitution, that may hand some group an undeserved victory, in the short term. But in the end, that victory--even for the group that won it--can never be worth the damage it causes to set an illegitimate precedent.

The Framers of the Constitution provided for change by providing amendment procedures in it. But they purposely made it hard to change--as any constitution worth the name should be. Unless a large majority of the country wants an amendment, it won't succeed. Two-thirds of both Houses of Congress or two-thirds of the state legislatures have to propose it, and three-fourths of the states then have to ratify it.

Lawrence v. Texas, the bizarre, result-driven 2003 decision that paved the way for creating a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, suggests how the Court would go about doing that. In Lawrence, it held that promoting a majority's belief that certain behaviors are immoral an act is not a legitimate state interest.

But as Justice Scalia noted in his dissent, the majority's belief that things like bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality, and obscenity are immoral is also the basis for outlawing them. By the Court's reasoning, there's no rational basis for those laws either. And laws without any rational basis are unconstitutional.

If the Court ever holds that conventional state marriage laws are unconstitutional, it will probably reason much like it did in Lawrence--that upholding the majority's moral standards is not a rational basis for refusing to allow same-sex couples to marry.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 61
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 4:16:16 AM

That's exactly what concocting a constitutional right to same-sex marriage would force the majority of people to do, in many if not most states. You obviously don't care about the right of all those millions to have their votes count. And that right IS fundamental. There's something very undemocratic about that.


Just substitute " constitutional right to same sex marriage" with the words "constitutional rights of minorities" or "equal rights for redheads" or "equal rights for women" in your arguments and get a sense of how bigoted and ignorant that comes out. Worrying about the "millions" who are uncomfortable about anal and oral sex, does not constitute a right on their part to act upon their tyranny of the majority by persecuting or relegating certain people to 2nd class or criminal class. The lifestyle is a consensual one, butt for certain prison and Catholic institution scenarios.

If we relied soley on the tyranny of the majority, blacks other minorities, and women would still no be able to vote and have equal rights. We would still have open and accepted slavery instead of the more subtle Prison Industrial Complex and food production industry models. We would still be burning witches at the stake. We do suffer somewhat fromt the tryanny of the 5/4 majority of the Supremes, but at least they try to move us into the 21st century more than the 17th thus far.

I did state "Matchlight and the homophobes", not including you as one, but noting that you and they were in the same camp as far as you opposition to equal rights for certain people. At least you try to reason, bogus as it appears to me, where the homophobes are just plain ugly about their prejudice.
 OMG!WTF!
Joined: 12/3/2007
Msg: 62
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 4:53:16 AM

To the extent the U.S. government ignores the Constitution, we are living under arbitrary rule--someone's whim--and not the rule of law. THAT is why it's so vital never to make any part of it mean what it clearly does not. When that happens, it undermines the freedoms of all of us


That's completely and totally backwards. The tyranny comes when you dogmatically follow some set of rules or boundaries that may or may not apply hundreds or thousands of years later. Strict followers of religious law come to mind. Bad cops. Grandpa's omni cure of rum, milk and a dash of pepper.

Plus exactly what earthpuppy said.
 IgorFrankensteen
Joined: 6/29/2009
Msg: 63
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 5:53:13 AM

Thousands of laws, including most criminal laws, enforce moral standards which religion sets out. It's not just coincidence that state laws make murder, theft, prostitution, etc. crimes.


Actually, from a legal and logical standpoint, that is exactly wrong. It is historically true that the SAME basic laws have been set forth again and again, and that the law promoters have USED the added help of religious belief to assist in enforcing those laws, but that does NOT mean that the existence and/or passage of the laws themselves, is an indication that RELIGIOUS BELIEF is what is key to them.

The S.C. concluded that you can't ditch a law on the grounds that it is ALSO held to be religiously correct. As far as I know, they did NOT say that a purely religiously motivated law could be Constitutional. Had they done so, it would have required a CHANGE in the Constitution, vis-a-vis "no law respecting."

As to the fact that codifying your religious ideas into law, causes you to lose RELIGIOUS control of them, that's not an opinion, that's an historically proven fact. It is ONE of the big reasons WHY the Constitution made the establishment of a state religion off limits. This was NOT done to protect Atheists, it was done to protect BELIEVERS.

If you don't see that, consider it from another (non religious) angle: back during the Presidency of Roosevelt, the GOP feared they might never get the White House back again, and pushed through the Amendment limiting the Presidency to two terms. At the time, they were apparently convinced that they'd NEVER have a candidate that would be popular enough to win more than two terms, and they wanted to at least prevent the Democrats from beating them as often. They did the same thing in the 80's, with their push for term limits for the Senate and House.
BOTH TIMES, it came back to bite them, because once you pass something into law, it STOPS being up to YOUR interpretation, and is under the control of who ever happens to be in power at the time. Unless you ALSO establish a permanent dictatorship, what ever you get passed into law will be out of your control.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 64
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 10:09:58 AM
Worrying about the "millions" who are uncomfortable about anal and oral sex, does not constitute a right on their part to act upon their tyranny of the majority by persecuting or relegating certain people to 2nd class or criminal class.


You are assuming without any basis that they consider homosexuality immoral because they are uncomfortable about those things. It's irrelevant in any case. They don't have to justify their moral convictions to anyone, any more than you do.


and Catholic institution scenarios.


That's a cheap slap at Catholicism, as ignorant as it is bigoted.


If we relied soley on the tyranny of the majority, blacks other minorities, and women would still no be able to vote and have equal rights. We would still have open and accepted slavery instead of the more subtle Prison Industrial Complex and food production industry models. We would still be burning witches at the stake.


Overheated language is a poor substitute for facts. Comparing same-sex marriage to the efforts to win equal rights for blacks and women is nonsense. Blacks gained their legal rights through the Civil War and three constitutional amendments made just after it. Women gained full voting rights through a constitutional amendment. Prohibition of alcohol, which was a cause many women supported, was achieved through a constitutional amendment.

The Constitution had to be amended in each case because the authority needed for the action didn't exist. And it doesn't exist here, either. The majority in any state has inherent authority to make whatever law it sees fit, as long as there is some rational basis for it, and it doesn't infringe too far on some right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

Even the Supreme Court knows better than to claim the Constitution guarantees a right to homosexuality. As the dissenters in Lawrence v. Texas noted,

"[N]owhere does the Court's opinion declare that homosexual sodomy is a "fundamental right" under the Due Process Clause; nor does it subject the Texas law to the standard of review that would be appropriate (strict scrutiny) if homosexual sodomy were a "fundamental right." Thus, while overruling the outcome of Bowers [the Court's first "gay" decision, from 1986] the Court leaves strangely untouched its central legal conclusion: "[R]espondent would have us announce ... a fundamental right to engage in homosexual sodomy. This we are quite unwilling to do."


That's why I said earlier that if the Court ever forces every state to authorize same-sex marriage, there's only one rationale it could rely on--the same one it used in Lawrence. And that is that maintaining the majority's moral standards, at least in matters related to sex, is not a legitimate state interest.

I agree with what Justice Scalia wrote in his dissent in Lawrence:

"persuading one's fellow citizens is one thing, and imposing one's views in absence of democratic majority will is something else. I would no more require a State to criminalize homosexual acts-or, for that matter, display any moral disapprobation of them-than I would forbid it to do so.

[Texas'] hand should not be stayed through the invention of a brand-new "constitutional right" by a Court that is impatient of democratic change. It is indeed true that 'later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress,' and when that happens, later generations can repeal those laws. But it is the premise of our system that those judgments are to be made by the people, and not imposed by a governing caste that knows best."

The irony is that so many of the people who are pressing to impose same-sex marriage on the whole country like to see themselves as fair and democratic. They're anything but. They want to use the Supreme Court to force their own self-righteous morality on the large majority of Americans that doesn't share it.
 cotter
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 65
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 10:15:36 AM
Well here's something for all the homophobes ... you know the ones who believe that hetero marriages are in danger from allowing gays to marry.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/06/red-alert-your-marriage-is-in-danger-from-the-gays/241068/%27%20rel=%27nofollow
Red Alert! Your Marriage Is in Danger From the Gays!
By Jeffrey Goldberg

Jun 27 2011, 9:33 AM ET
John Guardiano of The American Spectator is upset with something I tweeted the other day:

Last night's "historic" vote for "gay marriage" in New York ought to be a wakeup call to the Republican Party and social and cultural conservatives more generally. We are fighting, I regret to say, a losing battle -- and I say that as someone who strongly supports traditional marriage, and who believes that further attempts to undermine its special and privileged place in our society will have serious, baleful consequences.
Of course, liberals and "progressives" mock our concern. "For some reason," tweets The Atlantic's Jeff Goldberg, "I suddenly feel that my heterosexual marriage is under threat."
Goldberg's marriage isn't under threat, but the institution of marriage is -- so much so that marriage rates in America have plummeted and out-of-wedlock births have skyrocketed.

Oh, yeah, baby, I'm a progressive now. Anyway, if I felt that gay marriage posed a threat to my marriage, I would oppose it. And if I felt that gay marriage posed a threat to straight marriage, I would oppose it. First, my marriage: Today is our 18th wedding anniversary. Mrs. Goldblog and I met under the chuppah in Providence, Rhode Island on this day in 1993, and since then, I've given her three or four of the best years of her life. Ha ha, I kid! I kid because I love.

The thing about married people is, we like to be around other married people. It's natural, and its reinforcing. Gay or straight, it doesn't seem to make a difference. Anyone who has embraced the institution of marriage makes me feel good about marriage in general. Sometimes I wonder why gay people seek out marriage at all. From what I understand from my gay friends (sorry, friends who happen to be gay), there are certain advantages to the gay male lifestyle, such as: disposable income, sex with a lot of different people, and more disposable income. And yet, so many gay people seem to want to settle down with one person and build a home and life together. Doesn't this endorsement of marriage by people who have been excluded from marriage suggest something wonderfully traditional and stabilizing about this moment?

Guardiano also argues that gay marriage poses a direct threat to children:

Sure, this breakdown in the family has occurred independent of the push for "marriage equality." But it is still part and parcel of an overarching effort to undermine and deprecate traditional marriage and the traditional family.
It is still part of a broader political and cultural movement to decouple marriage from its principal purpose, which is the care and raising of children.

My marriage these past 14 years has been principally devoted to the care and raising of children, and also to the selection of kitchen tiles. But mostly it's been about children. And this is as it should be. But Guardiano obviously doesn't know very many gay people, because over the past several years, I've seen extraordinary parenting done by gay and lesbian couples, parenting of children who had been actual orphans before they were rescued by the evil gays and provided with homes, stellar educations, and most of all, selfless, limitless parental love. That's what gay marriage is about, then: the embrace by previously-marginalized people of a traditional institution, an institution indispensable for the raising of healthy, whole children.

Our country needs more threats like gay marriage.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 66
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 11:08:02 AM
It is humorous that it's all about States Rights and the Constitution up and until the discussion of "Gay Marriage" surfaces...then that tune changes.
 _xxxxxxxxx_
Joined: 4/5/2011
Msg: 67
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 11:41:44 AM

The irony is that so many of the people who are pressing to impose same-sex marriage on the whole country like to see themselves as fair and democratic. They're anything but. They want to use the Supreme Court to force their own self-righteous morality on the large majority of Americans that doesn't share it.


oh those pesky marginalized ones; "impose" "force" i've never considered those two words being synonymOus with 'equality' ...heh


as for pressing to impose righteous morality;


One articulate spokesman, D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge Ministries said it this way:

"Our job is to reclaim America for Christ, whatever the cost. As the vice regents of God, we are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government, our literature and arts, our sports arenas, our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors -- in short, over every aspect and institution of human society."


Other examples of what the key players in this movement think can be found here. While many American Christians will dismiss such statements as little more than the rantings of a handful of extremists, their influence reaches all the way to the American presidency.

In fact, the modern theocratic movement in America is an important wing of the Republican party. Republicans target fundamentalist churches and refer to their congregants as their "base." The Republicans gain votes at the expense of turning their party over to religious extremists who oppose stem cell research, push school prayer, meddle in end-of-life decisions, protest against evolution, and are openly bigoted toward homosexuals. These Christian extremists gain political power with which to push their theocratic agenda.

Evidence of an American Theocratic Movement

The possibility of a theocratic America is difficult to imagine, even for those of us who are concerned with preserving church-state separation, but there is evidence of both intent and progress in this direction.
Christian propaganda focuses on rewriting history to make theocracy seem more palatable.
Echoes of fascism are easy to identify in the modern theocratic movement.
American presidential candidates find it necessary to broadcast their faith.
Some states move to fund Bible education while others seek to require it.
Public schools hold graduation ceremonies in Baptist churches.
U.S. Senators espouse supernatural theories.
Christian leaders bash politicians for not living up to their Christian ideal.
Christian extremists call for atheists to be expelled from America.
Members of Congress call for prayer.
 DSSEVENTFIVE
Joined: 5/18/2011
Msg: 68
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 1:00:46 PM
Doesn't bother me at all. I mean really, if you think about it, how does it bother anyone what others do in the privacy of their bedrooms or , what kind of lifestyle they lead? I remember seeing a t-shirt that I think summed up my feelings on it pretty well also, "Don't like gay marriages? Then shut the f*ck up and don't get one".
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 69
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 1:26:05 PM

It is humorous that it's all about States Rights and the Constitution up and until the discussion of "Gay Marriage" surfaces...then that tune changes.


It doesn't change one bit with me. It's exactly because I believe in upholding the rights of the states and the people that I'm opposed to the continuing attacks on those rights by one branch or another of the federal government.

I am not interested in what any gay person chooses to do, provided it doesn't harm my interests in some way. Any state where a majority wants to allow them to marry each other is free to do that. But where a majority believes that is immoral and intolerable, no one has the right to force them to allow it.

I don't give a d---- what the social cause or grievance group du jour is--purposely disregarding the Constitution to help it is NEVER justified. Doing that undermines the foundation of all the freedoms we enjoy. The Supreme Court has made a very bad habit of rewriting the Constitution to impose the personal morality of several justices on the whole country.

The Constitution divides authority between the states and the federal government. It also divides that federal government into three branches and arranges for each one to act as a check on the others. And it grants the federal government only certain limited, enumerated powers.

The men who framed the Constitution designed these and many other features into it for a very good reason. They were determined to avoid various defects which had eventually caused political systems and societies to fail, down through history. They had studied all this carefully, and they understood that human nature--including the temptation to abuse power--hadn't changed.

The Judicial Branch was designed to be the weakest of the three, by far. Jefferson did not even want to have one. He even managed to get one of the justices impeached. And we wouldn't have any federal courts, other than the Supreme Court, if Congress hadn't passed laws to create them. It's also not clear that the Court is always the final judge of what the Constitution means.

But the Court has become arrogant, especially on controversial social issues. Not too many decades ago--at least before Roe--it usually stood back and let these issues be worked out through the political process. In Lawrence, though, it threw out the window a basic principle our courts had recognized since before this country began. As Justice Scalia said, the decision "effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation."

Scalia is also dead right that "the impossibility of distinguishing homosexuality from other traditional 'morals' offenses is precisely why Bowers [the Court's first "gay" case, in 1986] rejected the rational-basis challenge. 'The law,' it said, 'is constantly based on notions of morality, and if all laws representing essentially moral choices are to be invalidated under the Due Process Clause, the courts will be very busy indeed.'"

And if the Court ever imposes same-sex marriages on the whole country, our courts *will* be very busy deciding claims that state laws against obscenity, bigamy, polygamy, adult incest, bestiality, prostitution, adultery, etc. violate 14th Am. due process. None of those laws can survive, if maintaining the majority's moral views about matters related to sex is not a rational basis for them.

Anyone who disputes that should explain, specifically, why Justice Scalia (and the majority in Bowers v. Hardwick) were wrong on this point. If they can.
 Earthpuppy
Joined: 2/9/2008
Msg: 70
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 5:44:17 PM
Frau Bachmann's strategist, her hubby, puts this debate into context for the far Reich.
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/06/29/257646/bachmanns-husband-calls-homosexuals-barbarians-who-need-to-be-educated-and-disciplined/



Just last summer, Dr. Bachmann explained his position on homosexuality while offering theoretical advice to parents concerned that one of their children was gay.

BACHMANN: We have to understand: barbarians need to be educated. They need to be disciplined. Just because someone feels it or thinks it doesn’t mean that we are supposed to go down that road. That’s what is called the sinful nature. We have a responsibility as parents and as authority figures not to encourage such thoughts and feelings from moving into the action steps…

And let’s face it: what is our culture, what is our public education system doing today? They are giving full, wide-open doors to children, not only giving encouragement to think it but to encourage action steps. That’s why when we understand what truly is the percentage of homosexuals in this country, it is small. But by these open doors, I can see and we are experiencing, that it is starting to increase.
 dontfeellikeaging
Joined: 6/21/2011
Msg: 71
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 6/30/2011 7:48:26 PM
Lets see here......55% of "normal marriages" end in divorce, every one of us knows of miserable marriages,Larry King is on divorce 9, Tiger Jesse etc sleep with most people they see while married, major religous and politcal leaders are caught in the act, celebreties have marriages that last days,even hours BUT ....same sex marriages will destroy the institution of marriage? ? ? Hmmmmmm........
 SpiritWeaver
Joined: 6/18/2011
Msg: 72
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 7/1/2011 5:28:30 AM
Hahaha You are so right, I find it very odd that some people think that gay marriage is going to destroy marriage. Even more I find it amazing, that some people actually believe that gay marriage will open the door to a human getting married to another species. Another which is amazing, is that homosexuallity being accepted will get almost everyone to become homosexual and end the human race. Everytime I hear or read of someone saying this, I wonder if they themselves are actually "in the closet"! I have friends in the past who are gay and they never pushed someone else to become gay nor did their being gay make anyone become gay. If anything people being open about their homosexuality actually helps other people find it easier to accept themselves, weither they are gay or not. I was happy when this got passed in NY and I think it won't happen everywhere but it is a nice bump in the right direction. Also, using religion to set rules for society is a bad idea, only if everyone in that society follows that religion should it be a good idea!
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 73
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 7/1/2011 11:12:19 AM

I was happy when this got passed in NY and I think it won't happen everywhere but it is a nice bump in the right direction.


I don't know what makes you think it won't happen everywhere. Judging by the Supreme Court's arrogance about social issues during the last few decades, as soon as a third or even a fourth of the states have OK'd something, it jumps in and forces it on all the others. It never used to do that, and a lot of us don't think it has any authority to.


Even more I find it amazing, that some people actually believe that gay marriage will open the door to a human getting married to another species.


I don't mean this in a sarcastic way, but could that be because you don't completely understand the issue? You probably haven't read what I posted earlier on this, but if the Court ever holds that gays have a constitutional right to marry each other, I don't see how the laws against bestiality, adultery, bigamy, polygamy, prostitution, obscenity, etc. could hold up in court.

Neither did three justices in the 2003 case I talked about, Lawrence v. Texas. That was the Court's most recent decision on homosexuality and the Constitution, and the one that has most to do with same-sex marriage.

If maintaining the majority's moral standards on matters related to sex isn't a legitimate interest of government, as the Court said in Lawrence, that doesn't just apply to homosexuality. Especially considering the way the Court framed the issue in Lawrence, you can't open the gate and just let one thing through.
 _xxxxxxxxx_
Joined: 4/5/2011
Msg: 74
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 7/1/2011 11:47:04 AM


I don't mean this in a sarcastic way, but could that be because you don't completely understand the issue? You probably haven't read what I posted earlier on this, but if the Court ever holds that gays have a constitutional right to marry each other, I don't see how the laws against bestiality, adultery, bigamy, polygamy, prostitution, obscenity, etc. could hold up in court.


you're completely mired in xtainity and the religious dogma of your constitution, you can scratch the bestiality (non-consensual) and obscenity ( your country already is the poster child)...

*lessee, taps oranges and apples

that leaves: adultery? would you have any political or religious leaders left?
bigamy and polygamy, again take out the religious dogma and ? ? what ? ? as for prostitution it should be legalised..


If maintaining the majority's moral standards on matters related to sex isn't a legitimate interest of government, as the Court said in Lawrence, that doesn't just apply to homosexuality. Especially considering the way the Court framed the issue in Lawrence, you can't open the gate and just let one thing through.


/not so veiled homophobia
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 75
view profile
History
NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage
Posted: 7/1/2011 1:35:14 PM

you're completely mired in xtainity and the religious dogma of your constitution


Thanks for exposing me to a new word--"xtainity." I figure that because my mind is so narrow, I should at least expand my vocabulary. I also can't claim to have the same depth of understanding of constitutional law--not to mention the tolerance for other points of view--that you do. Such is life.

I guess you know the Constitution is the highest law, throughout the United States. Thanks, too, for showing us your contempt for that law, and for the memories of the million or so men who have died defending it during this country's 222 years.

Religious dogma? Exactly the opposite. If you knew the first thing about the Constitution, you'd know that the First Amendment forbids the government to make any law regarding an establishment of religion. You'd also know that the 1st Am. guarantees everyone's right to the free exercise of their religion.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > NY becomes 6th state to legalize gay marriage