Page 23 of 26 FirstFirst ... 132122232425 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 253

Thread: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

  1. #221
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    No it isn't, because sometimes the natural parents AREN'T the best situation for the child even though it's possible for them to raise the child.
    Ah, I see the confusion. Yes,I seriously doubt that anyone interpreting "possible" so strictly would agree with the statement. Given extreme cases where the parents are negligent, abusive, etc. -- of course you wouldn't want to force the child upon them.

    "Possible" also has a "reasonable/practicable/allowable" connotation, which is naturally what was intended. Thus, if the kid's parents are in jail - having the child live with them just isn't possible (even though in the strictist sense of the word, it is).

  2. #222
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Flippinfunky View Post
    What do you mean "so what?" You think it's better for a child to live with two parents who are incapable of showing each other love? I was raised in a broken home...not just once, but several times. I watched my mom get beat like she was a man by damn near every boyfriend/husband she had. Trust me when I say: kids would rather come from a broken home than live in one.

    As I said, living together or not, gay or straight, kids need love, stability and security.....and, they need their parents to respect each other (living together or not).
    I said "so what" because I don't find it terribly relevant. These sorts of things can occur in any relationship. All else being equal, it's better for a child to be raised by its natural parents. No, of course that's not always possible - in such cases a child may be forced to settle for the next best thing... or the third best thing, or the fourth...

  3. #223
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    64,047

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    I said "so what" because I don't find it terribly relevant. These sorts of things can occur in any relationship. All else being equal, it's better for a child to be raised by its natural parents. No, of course that's not always possible - in such cases a child may be forced to settle for the next best thing... or the third best thing, or the fourth...
    If the best thing for a child is to be raised by a gay couple then denying them marriage in order to make the family as legal and stable as possible is stupid.

    Plain and simple.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by OldFatGuy View Post
    Usually a gag for wise mouthed insulting little girls. Then some good nylon rope so I can tie them up, toss them in the trunk of my car and forget about them.

  4. #224
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,997

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    By your reasoning, there must be no right to marry, either - given that one person can choose to divorce the other?
    You are just wrong. The rights in the case of children are for the parents, not the children. And it isn't necessarily even the biological parents who have those rights to the children. It could easily be whoever has the actual guardianship/parental rights to the child.

    Do you believe that we should not put children up for adoption? Do you think that people should not be allowed to use IVF or surrogate mothers or sperm donations or donated eggs? Do you think that stepparents should never have any rights to their stepchildren, even if they adopt them or are more involved in their lives than the absent bio parent? Do you think we will ever really change these laws even if you just don't agree with them?

    What you talk about is kinda close to home for me because of some of my relatives' situations. One where a stepfather was a much better father than the real father. I have female relatives who have children out of wedlock or worse, the husband/father has been in jail or under a restraining order to come nowhere near the mother (he threatened to kill her). I know of a situation where at least one of the children is the result of a woman cheating and the child was still considered one of the husband's own even after he found out. Another situation where something the child was born with caused the mother to abandon her and then her father died, leaving her to be raised by her grandparents and the mother only really became a part of her life after she was an adult, taking care of herself. There are so many family situations out there and many do not fit what you seem to imagine a child's rights are concerning parenting of that child.


    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    It relates perfectly to your argument. Laws that grant remove/privilges are generally imperfect - your claims of "blatant bias" simply aren't credible. Given that you think "procreation alone is not really a state interest to begin with" - it would seem to make more sense to drop all the talk of childless heterosexual couples and apply the "similarly situated" argument to marriage in general.
    No it doesn't. There are valid considerations to be made for limiting something by age, which by the way is at a different level of scrutiny than sex. While some people may be better able to make decisions and more mature at 16 or younger than some over 18, this is not true for the vast majority.

    And despite your insistence otherwise, there is no valid state interest in procreation occurring for married couples as a reason for only allowing opposite sex couples to marry. If this were true, then there is absolutely no way the federal government or those 5 states could legally recognize those marriages in which the opposite sex couples are only legally recognized if they cannot procreate with each other. They would be completely against the purpose of procreation and legally so.

    Sex in no way affects a person's ability to fulfill any of the obligations/responsibilities of the legal marriage contract. I have said this many times. There is no obligation to have children with each other or be able to have children with each other in any marriage contract so it cannot truly be a consideration in who should be allowed to marry.
    "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.

  5. #225
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,997

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    I said "so what" because I don't find it terribly relevant. These sorts of things can occur in any relationship. All else being equal, it's better for a child to be raised by its natural parents. No, of course that's not always possible - in such cases a child may be forced to settle for the next best thing... or the third best thing, or the fourth...
    It isn't about settling for the next best thing or lower because there is no proof that bio parents are the best thing to begin with.

    And, as long as opposite sex couples are allowed to use other people's biology to create their children, even before the conception, then you can't say that the children are being forced to accept the next best thing. They would not have existed to begin with without that couple going through the process of getting other cells, besides their own, to make the child.
    "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.

  6. #226
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    It isn't about settling for the next best thing or lower because there is no proof that bio parents are the best thing to begin with.

    And, as long as opposite sex couples are allowed to use other people's biology to create their children, even before the conception, then you can't say that the children are being forced to accept the next best thing. They would not have existed to begin with without that couple going through the process of getting other cells, besides their own, to make the child.
    Sounds to me a lot like "the next best thing." Given the choice, the parent would have preferred using their own genetic material. And, while the child will likely grow to love that parent - given the choice - she would probably prefer to share both love and heredity.

  7. #227
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And despite your insistence otherwise, there is no valid state interest in procreation occurring for married couples as a reason for only allowing opposite sex couples to marry. If this were true, then there is absolutely no way the federal government or those 5 states could legally recognize those marriages in which the opposite sex couples are only legally recognized if they cannot procreate with each other. They would be completely against the purpose of procreation and legally so.
    What insistence?? I believe you were the one that started the discussion on procreation. I could be wrong, but I don't think I've made a single "procreation is a valid state interest" claim - I certainly haven't "insisted" it. For the most part, I've tried to stay neutral w/r to a particular state interest.

  8. #228
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Sex in no way affects a person's ability to fulfill any of the obligations/responsibilities of the legal marriage contract. I have said this many times.
    So what? Neither does Heredity, a Professional Relationship, or a Platonic Friendship.
    There is no obligation to have children with each other or be able to have children with each other in any marriage contract so it cannot truly be a consideration in who should be allowed to marry.
    Again, your reasoning makes no sense. Policy need not perfectly align with a state interest, and almost never does. I have said this many times.

    More examples of such reasoning:
    • There is no obligation to demonstrate that you have achieved sufficient maturity to vote at 18, therefore maturity cannot truly be a consideration in who should be allowed to vote. Open it up to all.
    • There is no obligation to demonstrate that you are unable to afford a higher tax rate simply because your level of income is low for a given year, therefore income cannot truly be a consideration as to what your tax rate should be. Do away with progressive taxes.

  9. #229
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by YoungConserv View Post
    Where is marriage given over to the government in the constitution I'm confused?
    it's not. The founder's certainly didn't need government's permission to get married. But government usurped the power with the Marriage License.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  10. #230
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,997

    Re: Court: Heart of gay marriage law unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by Taylor View Post
    Sounds to me a lot like "the next best thing." Given the choice, the parent would have preferred using their own genetic material. And, while the child will likely grow to love that parent - given the choice - she would probably prefer to share both love and heredity.
    No, I'm betting that the child wouldn't care one way or another as long as he/she has loving, good parents.

    Plus, some parents could use their own genetic material but would prefer not to because of the large possibility that their genetic material could pass some unwanted condition that could cause major concerns or even be fatal.
    "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.

Page 23 of 26 FirstFirst ... 132122232425 ... 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
  •