Wednesday, April 06, 2005

I think I'll be receiving my Special Olympics gold medal any day now!

Cuz look, I'm arguing on the internet!

Here's my personal highlights (I'm not going to post other people's statements, since, well, I didn't make them, and if you're curious about what they said, click the linky above)

1st relevant post: And yet the federal Constitution says that full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts and records and judicial proceedings of every other state.
Marriage is a civil act, correct? So in what way does the federal constitution lose to a state constitution?
And I do certainly recognize that this is the argument that proponents of this ban put forth for a national marriage amendment.
And in what way was the Kansas Marriage Act ineffective? I don't remember lines down at the courthouse for gays to engage in marital man-loving sanctioned by the state.

2nd: The 14th amendment is also at issue here. " . . . nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
cf. Meyer v. Nebraska (1923)"While this court has not attempted to define with exactness the liberty thus guaranteed, the term . . . ['liberty' refers to the following] . . . the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children . . . "
Also see Loving v. Virginia.

3rd: The Loving v. Virginia case is the (in)famous one in which the court ruled Virginia's miscegenation laws unconstitutional. The parallels are rather obvious. Here's the opening lines of Warren's opinion:
"This case presents a constitutional question never addressed by this Court: whether a statutory scheme adopted by the State of Virginia to prevent marriages between persons solely on the basis of racial classifications violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. For reasons which seem to us to reflect the central meaning of those constitutional commands, we conclude that these statutes cannot stand consistently with the Fourteenth Amendment."

Replace race with 'sexual orientation'.

4th: I'm back from lunch, and full of Mad Hatter-burger!
While you are correct, in the sense that you cannot simply replace one group with another (so the Loving case does _not_ endorse gay marriage), you can look at the Loving decision as a precedent to finding such laws regarding marriage as possibly unconstitutional.
The day is coming when a case reaches SCOTUS that does test DOMA and the various state amendments. It will be very, very interesting to see what happens.

5th: In what way is our society in chaos?
How would a family where there are two parents, of the same sex, be any worse as adoptive parents than our many single mothers? How would one gay single parent be any worse than our many single mothers?
Your 'red pen' argument is not an indication of chaos. Rioting in the streets over bread and circuses is an indication of chaos, and having just gotten back from Mass street, there was a definite lack of rioting and/or food lines.
Are there problems with society? Yes. Is political correctness the problem? Meh. PC is a strawman argument, I'm afraid. I would rather argue that a lack of tolerance for individual differences is the problem, and scaremongering of the sort that leads you to declare a 'society in chaos'. We have a society where people should be free to do what they want, as long as it doesn't harm others. And two gay people getting married in no way hurts anyone else.

6th: So , if you understand that other people have their views of how to run their own lives, why do you feel it is ok to impose your view on them? And prohibiting gay people from getting married due to your interpretation of the bible is definitely imposing your view on them.

7th: How is it wrong to understand 'tolerance' to mean wishing other people all the chances to be happy that you or I possess?

What is tolerant about telling other people they can't marry because YOUR god says THEY can't marry? Wouldn't it be more tolerant to accept that other people can find happiness without the bible?

And again, how is your marriage and your family threatened by Frank and Steve getting married and having VERY GAY sex while waving a marriage license? As long as their doing it in their home, how does this affect you?

2 Comments:

At 12:10 AM, Blogger Michelle said...


adult dating <<< Meet Thousands Of Singles In Your Area >>>

Hundreds Of Happy People Across The Globe Have Been Successful In Finding Suitable Partners With Online dating. Thousand Of People Are Looking For A Date Today. They Are Looking For Someone. Are You One Of Them?

Lonely? Single? Married?
Are you looking for someone to FLIRT?
Looking for someone to DATE?
Find your special someone.
Date man or women you desire!

Multilingual : English - Chinese Simplified - Chinese Traditional - Dutch - French - German - Greek - Italian - Japanese - Korean - Portuguese - Russian - Spanish

Free Trial! Chat Real Time with Audio & Video Capabilities. adult dating

 
At 12:37 PM, Blogger Rick Lee said...

family relationship

 

Post a Comment

<< Home