Page 21 of 26 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 253

Thread: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

  1. #201
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    There is no part of same sex marriage being banned that furthers any state interest.

    But, if they are trying to say, for the sake of argument, that procreation is the state's interest in marriage, then they would have to show how they are furthering that state interest by not allowing same sex couples to legally marry but also how that state interest is still furthered by allowing opposite sex couples who cannot have children to enter into marriage. The reason that they would need to address this with such an argument, particularly the federal government and certain states, is because it shows a blatant bias against only those of the same sex not being allowed to marry due to procreation but no regard for those of the opposite sex who are allowed to marry despite not being able to procreate.

    I have addressed this several times in the past, but here it is again. There are certain states that allow first cousins to legally marry only if they cannot procreate with each other. They have to show proof that they are infertile or that the woman is over a certain age in order to be able to enter into a legal marriage. These are all recognized as legal marriages by the federal government. This alone shows that the federal government and at least some states cannot claim that procreation is the main state interest in marriage for them and that is why they are banning same sex marriage because they are legally saying the opposite for certain opposite sex couples.
    But even if encouraging procreation was a state interest (legally, it isn't), and even if it were a compelling enough interest (it isn't), the state would still have to prove that preventing same sex couples from marrying would somehow cause them to procreate. The infringements on a right must further the problem trying to be solved by the infringement. Homosexuals do not form relationships and then think to themselves "well, since I can't marry my same sex lover, and I may as well marry some person of the opposite sex and make babies with them". That doesn't happen. So, not only would there need to be a compelling interest in procreation, but denying marriage to same sex couples would somehow have to further procreation, which it cannot possibly do.

    So the burden on SSM bans are even higher than you might think.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  2. #202
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    What does it mean when opponents of same sex marriage never seem to post in same sex marriage threads anymore and the only people left to debate the topic are people who support it?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  3. #203
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:12 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,168

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    It won't be that hard to argue that the state has no role in trying to enforce gender roles. Arguing that non whites should not be allowed to marry whites is not really any different than arguing men can't marry men or women can't marry women. Sex is just as immutable as race.
    Maybe when it comes to selling Big Macs, but not when it comes to marriage.

  4. #204
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:12 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,168

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    The state interest in having procreation is only that children are more likely to be raised by both parents if procreation happens within a marriage, instead of just a not-so-committed relationship. So that still goes back to the state's interest being married couples raising children, not actually making the children. And same sex couples are just as able to raise children as opposite sex couples are.
    Children have a right to be raised by both natural parents - that's what should be encouraged by the state. This idea that parents are completely interchangeable - that it doesn't matter who the parents are so long as they're married it's all the same, is kind of ridiculous.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Then you're not thinking in the way the law works. The state cannot discriminate against one group, same sex couples, for the only reason that keeps them from being just like most opposite sex couples, the ability to procreate with each other, while ignoring the fact that there are many opposite sex couples who cannot procreate with each other (and in some cases are not legally allowed to be able to) who are legally recognized as married. This will be a major argument against any argument made to support same sex marriage bans that are based in procreation. It points out, quite rightly, that the law is not being applied to two similar groups, same sex couples and those opposite sex couples who cannot procreate together, in the same way. That is what equality is all about.
    Again, it's unrealistic to assume - for any such law - that benefits granted will act in the state interest 100%. We have age limits imposed that restrict the right to vote. The state interest is that we want people to be intellectually mature enough to vote - yet, there are many 17-year-olds more mature than others in their 20's. There are 16 year olds who are better equipped intellectually to vote than some 50 year olds ever will be. Shall we test every citizen to ensure the state interest is met before we allow them to vote? Is the state showing a "blatant bias" for stupid 50 year olds or immature 20-year olds?

  5. #205
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,721

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Children have a right to be raised by both natural parents - that's what should be encouraged by the state. This idea that parents are completely interchangeable - that it doesn't matter who the parents are so long as they're married it's all the same, is kind of ridiculous.
    So we should ban divorce and single-parent households, right?
    Your opinion says its ridiculous. Meanwhile, actual research shows the opposite. It shows that children of same-sex couples do just fine. You have to do better than saying "it's ridiculous." I personally think allowing children to go to church is ridiculous. Should we ban that? Or would I have to somehow prove that going to church harms children?


    Again, it's unrealistic to assume - for any such law - that benefits granted will act in the state interest 100%. We have age limits imposed that restrict the right to vote. The state interest is that we want people to be intellectually mature enough to vote - yet, there are many 17-year-olds more mature than others in their 20's. There are 16 year olds who are better equipped intellectually to vote than some 50 year olds ever will be. Shall we test every citizen to ensure the state interest is met before we allow them to vote? Is the state showing a "blatant bias" for stupid 50 year olds or immature 20-year olds?
    Red herring. No state interest is served by banning same-sex marriage.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  6. #206
    Educator Flippinfunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Seattle, WA (Raised in SW Oklahoma)
    Last Seen
    08-01-12 @ 06:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    883

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Children have a right to be raised by both natural parents - that's what should be encouraged by the state. This idea that parents are completely interchangeable - that it doesn't matter who the parents are so long as they're married it's all the same, is kind of ridiculous.
    Many kids are raised in one parent homes and they turn out just fine.. and many kids are raised by two parents and end up screwed up. Just because mom and dad are in the home, doesn't mean its a loving home. How many kids live in two parent homes where they witness domestic violence daily?

    What a child needs, one parent or two, gay or straight, is love, stability and security.
    Silly poor people
    Tax cuts are for the rich!

  7. #207
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,121

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Children have a right to be raised by both natural parents - that's what should be encouraged by the state. This idea that parents are completely interchangeable - that it doesn't matter who the parents are so long as they're married it's all the same, is kind of ridiculous.
    You are wrong. Your entire view is based on an assumption and an overly broad one.

    If there wasn't over 40 years of science showing that children can be raised by same sex couples then you might have a point, but you come across as a person in complete denial when you ignore all that and make over generalized claims that are supported by nothing but your personal opinion.

    When are you going to accept it? You want to believe that a child is always best served being raised by their natural parents. It isn't a matter of what is true, it is only a matter of what you want to believe. And when you choose to believe what you want to believe over what is true, you are delusional.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 06-03-12 at 12:43 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  8. #208
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Children have a right to be raised by both natural parents - that's what should be encouraged by the state. This idea that parents are completely interchangeable - that it doesn't matter who the parents are so long as they're married it's all the same, is kind of ridiculous.
    No children don't have that right, not with the laws we have now in place. Children can be put up for adoption by their parents. Children can be taken from their parents by the state to be put up for adoption when the parents are deemed unfit. No single parent is required to either stay married to or get married to the other biological parent of a child. Parents can choose how much they contribute to the raising of any child, including absolutely none. Opposite sex couples who are infertile or unable to have children between them are completely allowed to use either a surrogate mother, a donated egg, or donated sperm to have children and the biological parent will have little to no rights to that child.

    Your opinion has no basis in actual law.


    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Again, it's unrealistic to assume - for any such law - that benefits granted will act in the state interest 100%. We have age limits imposed that restrict the right to vote. The state interest is that we want people to be intellectually mature enough to vote - yet, there are many 17-year-olds more mature than others in their 20's. There are 16 year olds who are better equipped intellectually to vote than some 50 year olds ever will be. Shall we test every citizen to ensure the state interest is met before we allow them to vote? Is the state showing a "blatant bias" for stupid 50 year olds or immature 20-year olds?
    You are not making any case here. Nothing you said relates to my argument. The argument is that people in similar situations, in accordance with a particular law, have to be treated the equally under the law. The only way the state can justify not treating those people the same is by proving that by not treating them equally they are furthering some state interest.

    Same sex couples are not being treated equally under the law as opposite sex couples who cannot procreate with each other. Of course, procreation alone is not really a state interest to begin with, but rather the raising of children in a two parent household is.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #209
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:31 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    63,807

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Maybe when it comes to selling Big Macs, but not when it comes to marriage.
    No idea why you won't respond to me but based off of the ridiculousness of this post it is probably a good thing...
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  10. #210
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:12 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,168

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    So we should ban divorce and single-parent households, right?
    Your opinion says its ridiculous. Meanwhile, actual research shows the opposite. It shows that children of same-sex couples do just fine. You have to do better than saying "it's ridiculous." I personally think allowing children to go to church is ridiculous. Should we ban that? Or would I have to somehow prove that going to church harms children?
    Wrong. Jump to conclusions much?

    Red herring. No state interest is served by banning same-sex marriage.
    It's called an analogy.

Page 21 of 26 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •