• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

muciti said:
Abolish marriage. Problems solved.
Click to expand...

No. This causes there to be a need for a lot more paperwork involved in custody, legalities, assets, medical decision and visitation, and many, many more things that marriage laws cover with one simple legal document.
 
TheNextEra said:
No, gay marriage is not going to lead to all that stuff just as interracial marriage didn't lead to the fall of America.

Unfortunately, if you cannot see the difference between how gay marriage came around and why child molestation cannot, there is no point in discussing this with you further. You have an irrational fear of gay marriage.
Click to expand...

Guess you missed the part where I said I don't oppose gay marriage huh? Or you forgot to read where there is a REAL law suit about polygamy as well? As most of your kind do, you fell back on the old "well, you're just scared of gays" argument. I'm not scared of gays and don't oppose gay marriage. What's you argument now?
 
MarineTpartier said:
Guess you missed the part where I said I don't oppose gay marriage huh? Or you forgot to read where there is a REAL law suit about polygamy as well? As most of your kind do, you fell back on the old "well, you're just scared of gays" argument. I'm not scared of gays and don't oppose gay marriage. What's you argument now?
Click to expand...

When you FEAR that gay marriage will lead to child molestation, that is an IRRATIONAL FEAR. So yes, you fear gay marriage.

As most of "your kind" do, you let irrational fears cloud your judgement.
 
muciti said:
You really dont see the difference between a consenting adult and a 13 year old girl? Something is wrong with you bud.

And reading the above it seems like the only problem most of you anti-gay marriage people have is that you think it will lead to child molestation. So you people really don't have a problem with gay marriage then?
Click to expand...

What in the world are you talking about?!! 1) Did you not read the first sentence? You know, the whole Devil's advocate thing? 2) I'm not anti-gay marriage. Maybe you should scan the rest of the thread before opening your mouth 3) What does gay marriage have to do with what I typed? All I simply said was that allowing gay marriage may encourage other groups to sue for similar rights. Such as the polygamy law suit pending right now. Guess you didn't read that either huh? You just jumped in the thread and commented on the first thing you saw. Do a little reading before you jump in and say something.....I'm going to stop. I already have 8 points on this website for calling people like you what they are.
 
Boo Radley said:
Children are not capable of consent, thus, not an issue that is in any way equal.

These are really slippery sloppe fallacies that come up far too often.
Click to expand...

As I've said to TheNextEra, a polygamy lawsuit is already in the courts. I was simply providing proof that someone saw the gay marriage debate tipping towards the gay community and thought they could capitalize. I hope it doesn't happen. Just saying its a possibility. Who would've thought 20 years ago we'd be this close to allowing gay marriage? No one.
 
MarineTpartier said:
What in the world are you talking about?!! 1) Did you not read the first sentence? You know, the whole Devil's advocate thing? 2) I'm not anti-gay marriage. Maybe you should scan the rest of the thread before opening your mouth 3) What does gay marriage have to do with what I typed? All I simply said was that allowing gay marriage may encourage other groups to sue for similar rights. Such as the polygamy law suit pending right now. Guess you didn't read that either huh? You just jumped in the thread and commented on the first thing you saw. Do a little reading before you jump in and say something.....I'm going to stop. I already have 8 points on this website for calling people like you what they are.
Click to expand...

And those groups would have to present their own arguments to the courts, just as same sex marriage advocates have to.

But, on top of that, since a 13 year old cannot take complete legal responsibility for themselves (I'm not even sure if a person can be a legally, fully emancipated minor at that age), there is no way they can take some legal responsibility for another adult. Now days, the marriage laws are changing in many states to not allow pregnant teens under the age of 16 (and in some states 17 and even 18) to get married just because they are pregnant without court approval. Even having parental consent doesn't get them a marriage that young in almost all (if not all) states.
 
MarineTpartier said:
Just to be the devil's advocate, who are we to say the children can't be in a relationship with an adult? Why can't a 13 year old girl marry a 30 year old man?
Click to expand...

1. Age discrimination is a lower tier of the EPC than Gender
2. The argument for disallowing children to get married, or have a relationship with an adult, is built upon the same foundation as all age discrimination things are such as not allowing kids to enter into contracts, curfew laws, laws against underage smoking and voting, and other such things. A firm argument to overturn just one of those would need to basically apply across the board.
 
MarineTpartier said:
If gay marriage is found to be a right, then things such as polygamy, child molestation, etc will start to pop up.
Click to expand...

As you've already shown, things such as challenges on those issues ALREADY happen. See the pushes by NAMBLA in the 90's, the polygamists even like you've just pointed out, etc. That's nothing new.

Additionally, because bad things may come out of doing the right thing doesn't mean you shouldn't do the right thing. Protecting the right of Christians to practice their religion in certain ways means that hardcore islamists also get that same protection or even other crazy cults...that doesn't mean we shouldn't fight for the rights of christians to practice their religion. If we argue that we should have free speech that means that the KKK can have parades proclaiming white supremacy or neo-nazi's can do rallies against the jews or that Westboro can proclaim that God Hates Fags and our military is evil......but because protecting Freedom of Speech would lead to more of those kind of crazy actions doesn't mean we shouldn't protect freedom of speech.

As a military man, you should know as well as anyone else that simply because people may do the wrong things with the rights they have doesn't mean we shouldn't defend their right to do it.

If its unconstitutional to prohibit same sex marriage, the belief that it may spur other groups to push for similar rights isn't a reason to fight against it.
 
Zyphlin said:
1. Age discrimination is a lower tier of the EPC than Gender
Click to expand...
There are no tiers in the Equal Protection Clause, nor is any protected class established by it. These originate from the Civil Rights Act of 1964, et seq.
 
Navy Pride said:
You forget this is no way a done deal. All 11 judges of the 9th circuit will have to rule on it plus the SCOTUS.
Click to expand...

It was a joke that obviously flew over your head.
 
Navy Pride said:
CC you are wrong. There are already groups in Utah lining up to see what happens on this issue. If gay marriage is approved why shouldn't they be allowed to marry 1 or a dozen partners. You don't want to discriminate against gays so how can you discriminate against them?
Click to expand...

So what? The only people I've seen have a problem with polygamy are the people who are also against gay marriage. People also tried to use the slippery slope argument concerning interracial marriage too. DADT was also repealed and the world has yet to come to an end. Time and time again society tries to progress and the naysayers try to hold it up by using fear propaganda acting like the sky will fall if things change. Eventually things do change and everything ends up being okay. Why would this be any different?
 
Zyphlin said:
As you've already shown, things such as challenges on those issues ALREADY happen. See the pushes by NAMBLA in the 90's...
Click to expand...
NAMBLA has always believed that age-of-consent laws unfairly discriminate against young people. There was nothing special about the 1990's from that standpoint. There are others as well who are shocked for instance by injustices wrought under statutory rape laws who would tend to support NAMBLA's position in some areas.
 
MarineTpartier said:
Just to be the devil's advocate, who are we to say the children can't be in a relationship with an adult? Why can't a 13 year old girl marry a 30 year old man? She's old enough to know what she's getting into. Its not like she's some 7 year old who will say yes to pretty much anything. She's 13. You see what I'm saying? I don't agree with it at all. But sicko's will say it and eventually soom kook judge will rule in favor of it. It will go to the Supreme Court and then who knows. It won't happen in the next 10 years or anything. But it will.
Click to expand...

MarineTpartier said:
Sister Wives' Polygamist Plans Suit to Challenge Polygamy Law - ABC News
Actually, his argument is gaining traction. The link provided talks about the show "Sister Wives". Apparently the male star of the show is suing the Utah state gov't saying they should not be allowed to prosecute him or any other practicer of polygamy for anything other than crimes such as incest, rape, child abuse, etc. In other words, they shouldn't be prosecuted for their polygamy, just the crimes that may spin off from it. I believe, as I'm sure most do, that this case will get thrown out. However, it will begin to set the precedent on how other polygamist's should go about attacking the legal system. If gay marriage is found to be a right, then things such as polygamy, child molestation, etc will start to pop up. I hate to believe it too, but I think Navy Pride is right.
Click to expand...

Children in relationships with adults would not pass rational review, as a clear interest in protecting children from relationships they are not ready for exists. Polygamy is tougher, but I doubt bans on it would fail constitutional checks. These are red herrings that have been repeatedly used and never once work since it is very clear, SSM is not polygamy, nor is it bestiality, nor relationships with children, nor any other type of relationship. They are distinctly different and as such would be different in the eyes of the courts.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Guys, let's talk the topic and not each other.
 
MarineTpartier said:
As I've said to TheNextEra, a polygamy lawsuit is already in the courts. I was simply providing proof that someone saw the gay marriage debate tipping towards the gay community and thought they could capitalize. I hope it doesn't happen. Just saying its a possibility. Who would've thought 20 years ago we'd be this close to allowing gay marriage? No one.
Click to expand...

And that's a separate issue that stands or falls on it's own merit. However, pedophilia or bestiality is non-starter, as neither can concent. What you call capitaliznig is really them making a fallacious argument, ne that doesn't hold up. it's called the slippery sloppe fallacy.
 
Samhain said:
I think the correct solution to this issue is to get the state out of the marriage game. Return the practice to religions, where issues of morality belong.
Click to expand...

Legal marriage has nothing to do with religious marriage unless the people involve want it too and the practice STILL remains with the churches.

SO thats not a solution because its not a problem, churches can still religiously marry anyone they wish or deny anyone they wish and the right wont be impacted.
 
Cardinal Fang said:
NAMBLA has always believed that age-of-consent laws unfairly discriminate against young people. There was nothing special about the 1990's from that standpoint. There are others as well who are shocked for instance by injustices wrought under statutory rape laws who would tend to support NAMBLA's position in some areas.
Click to expand...

What does the North American Marlon Brando Look Alikes have to with this?
 
Saying the solution is civil unions is dishonesty

Comparing equal gay rights to child molestation is even more dishonesty laced with ignorance.

As far a polygamy goes, Equal gay rights also wont impact that, polygamy is a different thing that would have to develop its own arguments. And for the record I would also support polygamy 100% as long as its the same basic rules, consenting human adults :shrug:. Its none of my business, the only real obstacle polygamy has is how to write its laws. IE when the a person dies what happens, who has the most power, spouse 1, the spouse with kids etc etc. The laws are the only problem but again none of my business.
 
To all my left wing friends who don't believe that the 9th circuit and specifically one of the judges who voted to overturn prop 8 here is your proof..........

Will the Supreme Court intervene over Proposition 8? | The Lookout - Yahoo! News


Why? First, Mazzone pointed out, the panel's ruling was 2-1, rather than unanimous, and it came from the 9th Circuit, the most reversed circuit in the country. Mazzone added that Reinhardt, who wrote the decision, is "among the most reversed" judges. As such, the ruling represents a "perfect storm for Supreme Court review


there you go Redress......
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
To all my left wing friends who don't believe that the 9th circuit and specifically one of the judges who voted to overturn prop 8 here is your proof..........

Will the Supreme Court intervene over Proposition 8? | The Lookout - Yahoo! News


Why? First, Mazzone pointed out, the panel's ruling was 2-1, rather than unanimous, and it came from the 9th Circuit, the most reversed circuit in the country. Mazzone added that Reinhardt, who wrote the decision, is "among the most reversed" judges. As such, the ruling represents a "perfect storm for Supreme Court review


there you go Redress......
Click to expand...

But this is not the only place in the country such laws have failed. See Iowa. Look around, court after court is throwing down bans. Doesn't amtter though, sooner or later, like it or not, gay marriage will be accepted. Fighting is merely pissing in the wind. not a good idea.

:coffeepap
 
MarineTpartier said:
Sister Wives' Polygamist Plans Suit to Challenge Polygamy Law - ABC News
Actually, his argument is gaining traction. The link provided talks about the show "Sister Wives". Apparently the male star of the show is suing the Utah state gov't saying they should not be allowed to prosecute him or any other practicer of polygamy for anything other than crimes such as incest, rape, child abuse, etc. In other words, they shouldn't be prosecuted for their polygamy, just the crimes that may spin off from it. I believe, as I'm sure most do, that this case will get thrown out. However, it will begin to set the precedent on how other polygamist's should go about attacking the legal system. If gay marriage is found to be a right, then things such as polygamy, child molestation, etc will start to pop up. I hate to believe it too, but I think Navy Pride is right.
Click to expand...

His arguments has zero traction and has always had zero traction. The same arguments cannot be used for polygamy as the do for homosexuality. Fact is, the way that gay marriage will ultimately win the day is NOT via the discrimination argument. It's through the government's reasons for sanctioning marriage at ALL argument. All research shows that married folks are healthier, more financially stable, do better rearing children, and create a more stable society, ALL of which help create a better functioning country. This is the reason why government sanctions marriage. Homosexual unions demonstrate the same rewards in research. Polygamy absolutely does NOT. Therefore, polygamy does NOT have the same components as same-sex marriage and is therefore a slippery slope argument that has no validity. I've told this to NP repeatedly over the years, but he refuses to listen.
 
Navy Pride said:
CC you are wrong. There are already groups in Utah lining up to see what happens on this issue. If gay marriage is approved why shouldn't they be allowed to marry 1 or a dozen partners. You don't want to discriminate against gays so how can you discriminate against them?
Click to expand...

NP, I've explained this to you several times over the years. Polygamy does NOT reap the same benefits as gay marriage does... which are the same that traditional marriage does. Therefore, the government has no reason to sanction it.
 
Navy Pride said:
There is good reason to keep the Gov in the marriage business especially where children are involved.
Click to expand...

Which is EXACTLY why gay marriage should be legal. Thank you for proving my position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom