View Poll Results: Could you accept no government recognized marriages as a compromise?

Voters
79. You may not vote on this poll
  • I oppose SSM but could accept no government recognized marriage as a compromise.

    6 7.59%
  • I support SSM but could accept no government reconized marriage as a compromise

    24 30.38%
  • I oppose SSM It's a function of government to recognize legitimate marriages. No compromise.

    7 8.86%
  • I support SSM. It's a function of government to recognize legitimate marriages. No compromise.

    42 53.16%
Page 1 of 51 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 503

Thread: Same sex marriage compromise

  1. #1
    Guru
    Smeagol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 11:35 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,147

    Same sex marriage compromise

    The US Supreme Court is presently considering a ruling that could lift opposite gender requirements for marriage in the US. Most people have firm opinions on this matter but I'm curious could our positions on the subject leave room for a compromise all could accept. If your perspective on same sex marriage is not constitutionally validated, could you accept government not recognizing any marriage as a compromise, assuming of course this wouldn't necessarily be your preferred option?
    Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011

  2. #2
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,170

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    The US Supreme Court is presently considering a ruling that could lift opposite gender requirements for marriage in the US. Most people have firm opinions on this matter but I'm curious could our positions on the subject leave room for a compromise all could accept. If your perspective on same sex marriage is not constitutionally validated, could you accept government not recognizing any marriage as a compromise, assuming of course this wouldn't necessarily be your preferred option?
    Yes. This is actually my preferred outcome.

    I don't see why the government is in the business of rubber-stamping people's personal romantic relationships. What business is it of theirs?

    I think the legal rights that are assigned to marriage (medical rights, childcare rights, etc) should be opened up to allow anyone to assign them to whomever they like. Only an individual can decide which people are the best to assign their own rights to, and a spouse may not be right for all of them.

    I think "marriage" should only be a social ceremony, or a name someone chooses to assign to whatever collection of rights they have traded with their spouse. But the rights themselves should be completely separated from a person's relationship status.

  3. #3
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Ft.Wayne In
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,307

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    The US Supreme Court is presently considering a ruling that could lift opposite gender requirements for marriage in the US. Most people have firm opinions on this matter but I'm curious could our positions on the subject leave room for a compromise all could accept. If your perspective on same sex marriage is not constitutionally validated, could you accept government not recognizing any marriage as a compromise, assuming of course this wouldn't necessarily be your preferred option?
    I'm thinking civil union? All the tax bennies etc.but no marriage certificate!

    The govt probably has no business in it anyway.As a christian I do not

    believe in gay marriage-but I don't make it my business.

    Hate the sin but love the sinner!

  4. #4
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,702

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    No compromise. Firstly, the State has an interest in fostering a stable family life and stable relationships. Second of all, if the institution of marriage was fine for government intervention for this long, it should retain its existence with inclusion of homosexuals. There's no danger to it with their inclusion. Third, doing the second will send a signal to homosexuals everywhere that given the option between including them into the fold, not doing so, or endorsing a scorched earth policy, the United States was more willing to deny the existence of marriage than have homosexuals in their midst.

    Edit: It's also telling that those who oppose same sex marriage are the ones who are most in favor of not having marriage for anyone. It's the reckless policy choice answered in that cliche screenplay script from a madman: "If I can't have it, NO ONE CAN!"
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 03-26-13 at 05:02 PM.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  5. #5
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    No compromise. Firstly, the State has an interest in fostering a stable family life and stable relationships. Second of all, if the institution of marriage was fine for government intervention for this long, it should retain its existence with inclusion of homosexuals. There's no danger to it with their inclusion. Third, doing the second will send a signal to homosexuals everywhere that given the option between including them into the fold, not doing so, or endorsing a scorched earth policy, the United States was more willing to deny the existence of marriage than have homosexuals in their midst.
    Yep, this.
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

  6. #6
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    The US Supreme Court is presently considering a ruling that could lift opposite gender requirements for marriage in the US. Most people have firm opinions on this matter but I'm curious could our positions on the subject leave room for a compromise all could accept. If your perspective on same sex marriage is not constitutionally validated, could you accept government not recognizing any marriage as a compromise, assuming of course this wouldn't necessarily be your preferred option?
    I'm not aware of any particular wording in your constitution as it relates to marriage so I presume it's a states' rights issue but I could be wrong. However, I've been saying for years, and repeatedly here, there would be no controversy, gay people would be no more interested in a marriage certificate than straight people, if the government didn't use marriage as a tool of social engineering and a qualifier for certain government benefits and goodies.

  7. #7
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    I am fine either way to be honest as far as the government is concerned probably because there is no way in hell they would ever outlaw all marriage. I don't think marriage is a right by any stretch of the imagination, but I have no problem with states allowing it or disallowing SSM.

  8. #8
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,193

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    No compromise. Firstly, the State has an interest in fostering a stable family life and stable relationships. Second of all, if the institution of marriage was fine for government intervention for this long, it should retain its existence with inclusion of homosexuals. There's no danger to it with their inclusion. Third, doing the second will send a signal to homosexuals everywhere that given the option between including them into the fold, not doing so, or endorsing a scorched earth policy, the United States was more willing to deny the existence of marriage than have homosexuals in their midst.

    Edit: It's also telling that those who oppose same sex marriage are the ones who are most in favor of not having marriage for anyone. It's the reckless policy choice answered in that cliche screenplay script from a madman: "If I can't have it, NO ONE CAN!"
    What must be considered, however, is that if the Supreme Court determines that same sex marriage is constitutional because it's a civil rights abuse otherwise, what's to stop single people from claiming the same civil rights abuse because they are being discriminated against based on their marital status?

  9. #9
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,212

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    State sponsered marriage is convient. It basically acts as a large stack of legal documents for one person. The reality is a lot of people decide to spend their life with one person and share resources. I'd be fine with what S&M mentioned...some way to virtually label someone as having all the rights afforded to spouses now but not sure how that is anything other than calling marriage something else.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  10. #10
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,170

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    No compromise. Firstly, the State has an interest in fostering a stable family life and stable relationships. Second of all, if the institution of marriage was fine for government intervention for this long, it should retain its existence with inclusion of homosexuals. There's no danger to it with their inclusion. Third, doing the second will send a signal to homosexuals everywhere that given the option between including them into the fold, not doing so, or endorsing a scorched earth policy, the United States was more willing to deny the existence of marriage than have homosexuals in their midst.

    Edit: It's also telling that those who oppose same sex marriage are the ones who are most in favor of not having marriage for anyone. It's the reckless policy choice answered in that cliche screenplay script from a madman: "If I can't have it, NO ONE CAN!"
    Excuse me, but I have always endorsed same-sex marriage rights. I realize society isn't ready for the radical idea that the government needs to get out of our bedrooms entirely.

    Since marriage isn't going anywhere anytime soon, I think all romantic relationships should be treated the same.

    However, that is not my ideal world.

    And a lack of a marriage contract does not mean a couple can't raise children. More and more people are choosing to cohabitate without marriage for lots of different reasons, and many raise children just fine. In fact, most childed homosexual couples raise children without a marriage license (which, unfortunately, is harder for them due to them being denied the right to assign their own legal childcare rights to each other).

    Allowing government to be the ultimate validator of a relationship does not guarantee a stable home for children. If it did, the divorce rate wouldn't be so high.

Page 1 of 51 12311 ... 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
  •