Announcement

Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gay and Lesbian Marriage....

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Questions for the group - is marriage an inalienable right. If it is an inalienable right, does a majority have a right to vote to take away an inalienable right from a minority? If it is not an inalienable right, then what is it?

    Yes marriage is an inalienable right but the minority hasn't had any rights taken away at all. Those who identify as homosexuals can marry -- that is, homosexual men can marry women and homosexual women can marry men.

    Comment


    • st0ut717
      st0ut717 commented
      Editing a comment
      Do you understand the meaning of inalienable?

    • Peregrinator
      Peregrinator commented
      Editing a comment
      @st0ut717 - yes, I do. I believe the first paragraph in my message above was initially a quote from someone else.

  • #17
    The same argument was used to defend laws against mixed race marriages, and it didn't work.

    Comment


    • #18
      The same argument was used to defend laws against mixed race marriages, and it didn't work.

      Except that marriage is between one man and one woman by definition, not one black man and one black woman, or one white man and one white woman. Still, the State still has authority to regulate marriage within certain parameters, such as criminalizing incest (which laws differ from State to State).

      Comment


      • st0ut717
        st0ut717 commented
        Editing a comment
        We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

        The State (read Govt )does not have the right to deny an individual the pursuit of happiness.

    • #19
      Except that marriage is between one man and one woman by definition

      No, they tried that TOO, and it failed. They claimed marriage was between one man and one woman of the same race.

      And "by definition" arguments fail, since humans create them and change them all the time. Seriously, the only response needed is "so what?"

      Comment


      • #20



        Generally speaking, state legislatures decide marriage laws, including which of the very small number of human relationships are eligible for marriage.

        It's true that the USSC ruled that state legislatures couldn't restrict marriage between races. It's also true that some state Supreme Courts have decided that their state can't restrict marriage to people of different sexes.

        But in general, marriage laws are decided by law by the political branches of government.

        That also means that legislatures can change such rules if they wish to do so. The legislature in Washington State passed a law approving gay marriage, which has been challenged by a referendum. So the issue will be up to the voters to decide in November.

        If the voters decide to approve gay marriage, that will be the law of the land. If the voters turn it down, it will continue to be prohibited.

        Comment


        • st0ut717
          st0ut717 commented
          Editing a comment
          No voters cannot make laws that are unconstitutional

      • #21
        "Yes marriage is an inalienable right but the minority hasn't had any rights taken away at all. Those who identify as homosexuals can marry -- that is, homosexual men can marry women and homosexual women can marry men."

        What if we expand it to say that a person has an inalienable right to marry the person they love? How does this argument hold up then?

        There have been a couple of questions that have been consistently asked of the opponents of same-sex marriage that have never been answered except by reverting back to the original argument of "tradition and history" which doesn't actually answer the questions and only serves to divert attention - How does same sex marriage affect your marriage? How does calling it marriage affect your marriage? So I'll ask in this forum - how does same sex marriage or calling same sex marriage by the word marriage personally affect your marriage?

        Comment


        • #22
          >>How does calling it marriage affect your marriage? So I'll ask in this forum - how does same sex marriage or calling same sex marriage by the word marriage personally affect your marriage?

          Comment


          • #23
            And "by definition" arguments fail, since humans create them and change them all the time.

            So do you think it would be possible for humans to change the definition of, say, murder, to make gay murder legal?

            Comment


            • #24
              Peregrinator asks:

              So do you think it would be possible for humans to change the definition of, say, murder, to make gay murder legal?

              Um, for the moment I am going to assume that this question makes any sense at all...

              Do you mean murder of gay people or murder by gay people?

              Either way, I think there would be an "equal protection" problem -- a problem that does not exist by changing the definition of marriage to allow same-gender marriage. (Though a few state Supreme Courts have ruled that keeping a definition of marriage that excludes same-gender couples does violate "equal protection" under their State Constitutions.)

              Comment


              • #25
                And "by definition" arguments fail, since humans create them and change them all the time.

                So do you think it would be possible for humans to change the definition of, say, murder, to make gay murder legal?

                You ask that as if it's hypothetical:
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missouri_Executive_Order_44

                Plus, of course, some abortion opponents claim it's been done for abortion.

                Now, since states set laws about murder, a state could pass a law to not classify killing someone who's gay as murder (or, classify someone killed by someone who's gay as murder, depending how you meant 'gay murder'), though that would almost certainly fail an equal protection challenge.

                And since you just ask about 'humans', history is rife with examples of murder of unpopular minorities being legal, and often helped by governments.

                Comment


                • #26
                  Eagledad,

                  Allowing same-gender couples to get married does not affect the marriages of your children (or mine), or their children, or ours. And if you want to talk about immoral behaviors affecting marriage, just look at infidelity among heterosexual couples, not to mention how children are used as pawns in divorce -- by heterosexuals. And then there's the divorce rate itself. Gay people didn't cause that. Straight people did it all by themselves.

                  Allowing gay marriage, of course, will lead to some of those marriages being torn apart by infidelity and all the other things that tear straight marriages apart. But that's not because they're gay, it's because they're people.

                  Comment


                  • #27
                    >>Allowing same-gender couples to get married does not affect the marriages of your children (or mine), or their children, or ours.

                    Comment


                    • #28
                      Oh, well, then if you say so. LOL

                      I do.

                      Speaking of marriage...

                      Comment


                      • #29
                        "So do you think it would be possible for humans to change the definition of, say, murder, to make gay murder legal?"

                        Since humans defined what murder means in the first place, then yes, humans can re-define it as they see fit.

                        Comment


                        • #30
                          >


                          This is one of the universal claims of the sexual liberation movement.

                          Divorce, pornography, availability of abortions, abortions for minors, availability of contraception or whatever.

                          The claim is always that a person who objects to such things needn't do it.


                          But how has divorce, pornography, abortions, contraceptives and a long litany of other elements of the sexual liberation agenda changed our culture for EVERYONE? I would say it has transformed our culture, and very often for the worse.

                          So I think your claim is bogus.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X