• 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!

Is Gay Marriage a Constitutional Right in the U.S.?

Is Gay Marriage a Constitutional Right in the U.S.?


  • Total voters
    64
The use of a poor source like Wikipedia aside, thank you for actually providing something. That seems to be so difficult for so many people.
I'm sure I could have checked each state individually, but that seemed like a whole lot of unnecessary work.
 
Haha, are you serious? You couldn't even defeat Prop 8 in the most liberal state in the union. Give me a break.

Proposition 8 would have failed if the message of the Messiah of love everyone and free money forever were heeded. However, the bigots that voted for the Messiah also voted against Prop 8. All of those Messiah worshipping bigots were liberals, of course.

So your argument fails on a couple of points.

First, I'm assuming from your handle that you wish you were a conservative.

Well, conservatives shouldn't encourage the abuse of government power to constrain the choices of adults above the age of consent regarding decisions that have zero impact on the freedom of others.

And, you're attempting to argue that the failure of a specific ballot proposition refutes the argument that people should be free to marry whoever they choose, assuming those people are old enough to give free consent to the marriage.
 
Phoenix said:
"The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious gender specific discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of the same gender resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State. "
I don't follow your argument here. Can you explain more?
I changed the wording in the quote to same sex instead of race. When read in this manner all the things expressed, same sex couples can do today.
The Lovings were actually arrested FOR BEING MARRIED. The police burst into their home not only hoping to find evidence of them being married but also hoping they would be doing the nasty because that was against the law also. It wasn't about whether the government handed them a certificate that would allow them special privileges. In fact they had a certificate and it was used against them to prove they were living as a married couple and therefore violating the law. For this they were CONVICTED OF A CRIME and SENTENCED TO JAIL.
A same sex couple today would not be arrested because they are not committing a crime. Without the conviction portion of the equation I fail to see how someone's freedom is being violated as expressed in the summary of the Loving case.
There are other nuances too...
 
I haven't read this long thread completely so I apologize if someone has already said this. Imo gay marriage is a constitutional right. The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment demands equal treatment. Even Dick Cheney recognizes this to be true.
 
No, but if we're talking about what the majority of the nation supports, I would say that's a damn good litmus test. I mean, we're not exactly talking about the bible belt here.

Captain Courtesy is just smashing you into any legitimate response! This is great! :lol:
 
Just a joke :2razz: You know, one spouse will use it as an excuse not to go see grandma....

On the serious side - I don't consider 'gay' to be biological (it's psychological, a choice, what have you) but I don't consider it be a big enough of a deal to keep people from getting married.
I just don't care that much - it's the least of my concerns when it comes to society problems and so forth.

Seriously? Did you choose to be heterosexual? Why is it assumed that they choose, when you yourself did not choose to be heterosexual. I can get that they choose to act on it, but choose to be homosexual? :shock: Who chooses to be treated the way people in this country treat homosexuals.

I haven't read this long thread completely so I apologize if someone has already said this. Imo gay marriage is a constitutional right. The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment demands equal treatment. Even Dick Cheney recognizes this to be true.

I totally agree. You don't choose your sexual orientation, much like you don't choose your race. Gay marriage should be legal across the board. I look forward to the day our children look at this time period and wonder wtf took us so long - much like we (most of us, anyway) look at interracial marriage issues of the past.
 
Seriously? Did you choose to be heterosexual? Why is it assumed that they choose, when you yourself did not choose to be heterosexual. I can get that they choose to act on it, but choose to be homosexual? :shock: Who chooses to be treated the way people in this country treat homosexuals.

Me not believing it's biological isn't a bad thing - my view is based on that fact that there's still no solid proof otherwise and until there is, that's my view.

I support non-sexual-orientation equal rights (two people can get married - gender unimportant) and that should be sufficient for people. I don't have to agree 100% with everyone's sentiments and I refuse to pretend I do.

By some believing it's biological suggests that it's genetic and can even be inherited - do you feel that's true? Do people truly believe there are genetic markers that would let someone examine a homosexual male after death and determine his true sexual orientation?

They can, though, examine your DNA and determine gender - but not sexual-orientation.
 
Last edited:
Me not believing it's biological isn't a bad thing - my view is based on that fact that there's still no solid proof otherwise and until there is, that's my view.

I support non-sexual-orientation equal rights (two people can get married - gender unimportant) and that should be sufficient for people. I don't have to agree 100% with everyone's sentiments and I refuse to pretend I do.

By some believing it's biological suggests that it's genetic and can even be inherited - do you feel that's true? Do people truly believe there are genetic markers that would let someone examine a homosexual male after deal and determine his true sexual orientation?

Is there proof that we choose heterosexuality? (Seriously curious, don't know if I've ever heard/read the answer to this.)

I don't think you have to agree with me, I'm just honestly always shocked to hear/read someone say that they think people choose their sexual orientation. The way this country treats gays, I would never choose to be gay. I guess that's just how I look at it.
 
Is there proof that we choose heterosexuality? (Seriously curious, don't know if I've ever heard/read the answer to this.)

I don't think you have to agree with me, I'm just honestly always shocked to hear/read someone say that they think people choose their sexual orientation. The way this country treats gays, I would never choose to be gay. I guess that's just how I look at it.

I edited this particular subject into my previous post before you posted the question (pointing this out just to avoid confusion).

There are a lot of things people choose to do eventhough there's resounding feelings against it - some people choose to become exotic dancers and prostitutes even where it's illegal, some people choose to deal drugs and commit murder and theft eventhough it's strongly opposed to by most.

People aren't sheep - they make their choices based on want they want to do, not everyone is bothered or affected by what other people think they should do.

But that isn't the basis of my view - if someone "has always felt this way" then perhaps it's psychological, as I suggested, yet not biological - and some evidence does support this.

Being straight, specifically, cannot be determined by examining DNA - yet it's quite natural and not a choice. Homosexuality is not natural - it is not an "instinct" or other such quality of humanity. It is a dirivative of the norm. - Now, true, 'choice' can be debated but being a dirivative of the norm is not really debatable.

Yet - I'm not saying that homosexuality is bad (which is what most people conclude when they consider the 'psychological/choice' view) - I'm just saying it's not the natural norm nor is it biological.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom