View Poll Results: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

Voters
71. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    23 32.39%
  • No

    47 66.20%
  • I'm really not sure

    1 1.41%
  • What's marriage?

    0 0%
Page 15 of 21 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 206

Thread: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

  1. #141
    Professor
    Mathematician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    09-22-17 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    2,147

    Re: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggen View Post
    I think you have a pretty low opinion of women in general. How is it again that SSM harms you?
    I think it's less of a low opinion and more of a realist point of view Jerry has. I'm sick of people trying to turn clear inequality into equality on many issues.
    "With me everything turns into mathematics."
    "It is not enough to have a good mind. The main thing is to use it well."
    "It is truth very certain that, when it is not in one's power to determine what is true, we ought to follow what is more probable." -- Rene Descartes

  2. #142
    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: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Race is protected under the constitution. Interracial marriage between a man and woman was ruled unconstitutional. I'm all for putting up an amendment that protects sexuality or says that it's gender equality to deny marriage rights to women x women and men x men. Under the current law though it's all up to the states and it is their right.
    Sex/gender is protected by that same Amendment protecting race. Reed v Reed proves this.

    And interracial marriage bans were allowed and considered a right of the state up til the ruling of Loving v VA.
    "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.

  3. #143
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,951

    Re: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Sex/gender is protected by that same Amendment protecting race. Reed v Reed proves this.

    And interracial marriage bans were allowed and considered a right of the state up til the ruling of Loving v VA.
    If the ERA was ratified you would be correct. States and the federal government can regulate things based on gender. Women can't partake in combat roles, only men have to sign up for selective service and be forced to serve, areas prohibiting men and women can be created and all the states (besides CA) have had legal impositions of gay marriage bans without the law overturning them. I don't think, as the law is written, that it's unconstitutional to define marriage between a man and woman.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  4. #144
    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: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    If the ERA was ratified you would be correct. States and the federal government can regulate things based on gender. Women can't partake in combat roles, only men have to sign up for selective service and be forced to serve, areas prohibiting men and women can be created and all the states (besides CA) have had legal impositions of gay marriage bans without the law overturning them. I don't think, as the law is written, that it's unconstitutional to define marriage between a man and woman.
    They can only do so while protecting an important state interest. What is the state interest in keeping legal marriage between only a man and a woman? Tell me exactly what that state interest is. I know it isn't procreation, because a) at least 5 states could not use that for their own laws concerning certain opposite sex couples, b) there are opposite sex couples that cannot procreate, c) even couples with children are allowed to get divorced, and d) no couple is required to be able or want to have children together to get legally married.
    "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. #145
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,749

    Re: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    That side-steps the issue. Is marraige a state or federal matter? Currently it is a state matter but many wish to make it a federal matter simply by a SCOTUS edict that gender discrimination is involved, prohibiting SS couples from participating. That is a dangerous path to go down as next that may be said for title 9 as well, if a school must provide equal athletic slots for men and women does it then need equal allocation based on race and orientation as well? If a man can be a wife, may they not also be a 'female' athlete? Equal protection can be said to mean proportional representation as has been tried with 'title 9' and 'affirmative action' nonsense in the past. We are fast approaching a point at which constitutional power may be granted without the need for any amendments, simply by inferring or 'interpreting' one thing to apply to another. The federal gov't has no business in saying that the state marraige of one man to one woman agreement, just as the federal title 9 school athletic requirement is, is wrong.
    You miss what I'm saying. I'm saying instituting same-sex marriage right now would not require any changes whatsoever in any of the property rights or inheritance rights or custody rights laws that we currently have in place. We could simply declare gay marriage be legal and the laws currently on the books that deal with marriage would work just fine, either for same sex or opposite sex couples. It's something we could, and should, just do right now.

    For polygamous groups though, the current laws on the books wouldn't work because the current laws only work for 2 person marriages. If we were going to allow multiple-person marriages, and I have no problem whatsoever doing so, we need to consider the ramifications of these arrangements on the existing law and how we're going to modify the law to account for them, especially in divorce proceedings. It's insane to say "let's do it and not worry about the legal problems until later".
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  6. #146
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lightning View Post
    I'd like for you to point out where in our Constitution there is a clause that says marriage is a right...thought so.
    The 9th amendment states...

    Amendment 9 - Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.

    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
    This shows that there are rights that people have that are not enumerated in the Constitution.

    SCOTUS has determined that marriage is a fundemental right. Which means that even though it is not talked about in the Constitution it is still covered by the Constitution via the 9th Amendment.

    In point of fact the Bill of Rights would never have passed if the 9th Amendment and the 10th Amendment had not been included in it because many people were afraid that if they weren't then the rest of the BoR's would have been considered the only rights that people were allowed.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  7. #147
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    If that is the case then what is so sacred about marraige applying to only two partners? Polygamy preceeded same sex marraige and is much more popular among many religions. Is it not prohibiting the free exercise of religion to restrict marraige to only one spouse? You seem to imply that a law that simply does not include something is, in effect, a ban on it. Using that logic polygamy is banned as well. It is very different to strike down a law as unconstitional, than to require adding provisions to it. SSM, like polygamy, simply not being a privilege granted by a given state is not the same as a ban on it. If MS would not accept a SSM granted legally in VT then that may be a constituional issue, but MS is not violating the rights of anyone by not offering SSM in their state. Many states have differing laws, simply because CA allows medical marijuana does not mean that TX must also do so. Even though federal prohibition of alcohol was repealed does not compel every state, county and city to allow it.
    Your post here assume that marriage is only a religious ideology. Its not. In fact marriage was a state thing long before religion got involved. Hell, Columbus discovered the America's (1492) before religion officially started to get involved (1563, the year the Council of Trent decreed that all marriages had to be celebrated in the presence of a priest and have at least 2 witnesses).
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  8. #148
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    That side-steps the issue. Is marraige a state or federal matter? Currently it is a state matter but many wish to make it a federal matter simply by a SCOTUS edict that gender discrimination is involved, prohibiting SS couples from participating. That is a dangerous path to go down as next that may be said for title 9 as well, if a school must provide equal athletic slots for men and women does it then need equal allocation based on race and orientation as well? If a man can be a wife, may they not also be a 'female' athlete? Equal protection can be said to mean proportional representation as has been tried with 'title 9' and 'affirmative action' nonsense in the past. We are fast approaching a point at which constitutional power may be granted without the need for any amendments, simply by inferring or 'interpreting' one thing to apply to another. The federal gov't has no business in saying that the state marraige of one man to one woman agreement, just as the federal title 9 school athletic requirement is, is wrong.
    Slipper slope fallacy.

    Are you going to say that SCOTUS had no buisness in ruling in Loving vs Virginia? That it should have stayed a state issue?
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  9. #149
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggen View Post
    I think you have a pretty low opinion of women in general.
    A given SSM doesn't have to involve women at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggen View Post
    How is it again that SSM harms you?
    Pro-ssm argues that I should accept gay behavior. This would be a violation of my right to free religious expression. It's one thing to welcome and encourage folks to support gays, but pro-ssm goes further as to villainize, troll, and insult those of us who simply maintain a different religious opinion.

    Tolerance is a 2 way street.

  10. #150
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should same-sex marriage be left to the States?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Pro-ssm argues that I should accept gay behavior. This would be a violation of my right to free religious expression. It's one thing to welcome and encourage folks to support gays, but pro-ssm goes further as to villainize, troll, and insult those of us who simply maintain a different religious opinion.

    Tolerance is a 2 way street.
    SSM does not in any way inhibit your right to free religious expression. No church is going to be required to marry two people of the same sex. No one is going to force you to attend a same sex wedding. No one would care if you went around with a t-shirt saying "SSM is a SIN"....well, they might care but there would be nothing that they could legally do about it. And I would support your right to such a thing just as hard as I am supporting SSM. Hell, you could go door to door like a JW and pontificate about how much homosexuality is a sin and SSM is wrong all that you want. No one is telling you to stop.

    So in what way does SSM actually inhibit your right to free religious expression?

    I'm going to assume that you are some sort of Christian, if your not then just take this the way that its meant. Does allowing other religions to practice thier religion in the same country as you in any way inhibit your free religious expression? Even if they may teach the opposite of what you believe in? The answer to that I would hope would be "no". And if that is true then how is it that allowing SSM which does not affect you in the same way that allowing some other religion in the US doesn't affect you be any different?
    Last edited by Kal'Stang; 05-29-12 at 01:59 AM.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

Page 15 of 21 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... 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
  •