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.
In the majority of jurisdictions in the US, is remains unbroken. However, it might become shattered in California if the prop falls. As anyone but a buffoon knows, marriage in the US has historically, in the main, been between 1 man and 1 woman. In fact, of all the thousands of married couples I have met either in Europe or America, since 1960 or so, I have met exactly 0 who were other than 1 man, 1 woman.
It should, IMHO, remain so, even though from time to time the idea of multiple wives has a certain appeal to it. Nonetheless it isn't about my desires, it is about the desires of society for its best interest.
Explain why please. Beyond your convoluted idea of what is and always has been again, as has been pointed out many times, what was is usually not a very good argument). Tell us why YOU think it is in the best interest of everyone to define marriage as the church defines it?
Oh, bother! Better that government just get the hell out of the marriage business altogether. Leave that designation to the various churches and simply accord all parallel rights, especially as regards taxation, rights of survivorship, joint tenancy, etc. to the state and federal processes. Call it a domestic partnership, civil union or whatever under those parallel laws. Let everyone who wants to "couple" do so under those provisions and then those who choose to marry in their respective churches do so.
This is coming from a Catholic who doesn't believe in same-sex "marriage" but who also has a "married," complements of Massachusetts, lesbian daughter living in California. She and her "wife" are stable, happy, responsible people, hard working and deserving of those same benefits my wife and I enjoy. Just don't call it "marriage" and 90% of the arguments would whither up and die. It's all been horribly over-blown by both sides.
Beware America, your vote no longer matters. What liberals want they will get. If they can't get a law passed they will force it through the courts. Kudos to Washington for doing this the right, democratic way and passing it through the legislature. Surely California could do the same. This is a slippery slope we are headed down.
I just find it ironic that those who support gay marriage, are the same ones who think government can mandate health insurance.
The individual mandate is the brainchild of the Heritage Foundation and a group of Republican Senators who were the first to try and institute it as US law back in the early 90s. Are you saying that:
Orrin Hatch, Jesse Helms, Bob Dole, Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott, Larry Craig, Ted Stevens, Charles Grassley, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Daniel Coats, Thad Cochran, Richard Lugar, Frank Murkowski, Alan Simpson, Bob Bennett, Hank Brown, Lauch Faircloth, Paul Coverdell, Conrad Burns, Judd Gregg, Dirk Kempthorne, Connie Mack, Bob Smith, and Malcolm Wallop
Those who fall for anything, stand for nothing. Also I am not religious I haven't been to church outside of a marriage, baptism or funeral in about a decade.
My objection to gay marriage is based on tradition and that throughout the entire span of human history, throughout diverse cultures even those that were tolerant of homosexuality. There has never been an institution called gay marriage until the West in its infinite wisdom decided so.
It's the height of arrogance and hubris to institute such an institution now.
Sorry, but that's just not true. There were gay unions in human history in different cultures. You should probably not believe everything the bigots on C-D have to say on the matter and just open an actual book.
Further, can you please explain why tradition cannot ever be allowed to change? Humans constantly alter how we used to do things with technology, social attitudes, etc. How do you think we have interracial marriages? How do you think women are allowed to vote and own property? Your position is neither logical nor supported by historical evidence. If you are really not religious, then your reasoning makes even less sense.
Children enter into contracts all the time. How do you think they make movies?
Their PARENTS sign the contract, as is the case with any legal situation involving children... I know this for a fact, as my siblings and I were all models (including some commercials & a music video on my brother's part) as children. I never signed a contract, my parents did!
Quote:
And what concerns should there be about incest? Remember your argument, that if 2 people can enter into a contract, then they should be allowed to get married? I can enter into a contract with my mother, hey, I should be allowed to marry my mother, right?
But why put parameters of adults into the equation? Just because that sets your standards, doesnt mean others should have to follow your wishes, right?
Provided you're an adult at the time, I personally couldn't care less if you want to marry your mother... but the arguments against incest have a medical basis, so we're opening up a whole new can of worms with that one. Why do you guys always (so predictably) head down the incest & beastiality road whenever gay marriage is discussed? Neither are relevant to the debate, so methinks you are just grasping at straws - since all logical arguments against gay marriage are so easily disputed.
P.S. Go California!! Just the first step in overturning PropH8, but at least things are headed in the right direction now.
My objection to gay marriage is based on tradition and that throughout the entire span of human history, throughout diverse cultures even those that were tolerant of homosexuality. There has never been an institution called gay marriage until the West in its infinite wisdom decided so.
It's the height of arrogance and hubris to institute such an institution now.
Wow... I think that's the most ridiculous argument I've heard against gay marriage, and that is quite a feat to accomplish!
If we rejected every idea that was "new" throughout history, where would society stand today? Let's see - women would still be property, slavery would still be legal, interracial marriage wouldn't exist, marital rape would be legal, and so on & so forth. Oh yeah, and since you seem mostly concerned with adding any new vocabulary to our society, I guess that computer & Internet you're using wouldn't exist. I mean, who ever heard the word Internet before the last century? How arrogant of us to introduce such a foreign concept!! LMAO
Btw, the whole premise of this thread is kinda misleading, since this recent decision didn't actually "change" anything - in fact it reversed the change to our Constitution inflicted by PropH8, since prior to its introduction there was no gender mentioned in the state marriage laws. THEY (supporters of the prop) tried to change the definition, when things were already all-inclusive as they were. So what were you all saying about change? Hmmm, pot meet kettle!
I just find it ironic that those who support gay marriage, are the same ones who think government can mandate health insurance.
Just as I'm sure some people find it ironic that conservatives shout for "smaller government", but then support moral legislation such as prohibition of same-sex marriage.
I'm just not one of those people.
However, I also feel that if you turn down insurance coverage, you should be added to a national database and hospitals should be able to decline services to you without the proven ability to pay.
This is exactly what the homosexualists want. If they can get SCOTUS to uphold Prop 8 and its provisions then they will have a rally cry for a new referendum to overturn Prop 8 by a vote.
It doesn't really matter. It'll happen eventually. Maybe not this year, maybe even not next year. Maybe even not in this decade.
But it's only a matter of time before laws prohibiting same sex marriages are mentioned in the same sentence as laws prohibiting inter-racial marriages.
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.
