• 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!

Federal Judge Rules Va. Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional

Shadow Serious said:
The problem is not what the government "establishment" cares about but what certain religious people are concerned about when the concept of same sex marriage is brought to the fore. What concerns me is that the Courts must make a ruling based on an appropriate legal metaphysical basis and not one based on a political contemporary ideology.
Click to expand...

The rulings are being made on an appropriate legal basis. I've told you this half a dozen times now. You should read them.
 
•Visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility.

first one is a hospital rule not a Federal law and not all hospitals adhere to those rules that is an assumption not a fact.

•Making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment.

Just as you can assign someone other then your spouse to make medical decisions for you so can you also have a legal document that gives someone the ability to make medical decisions if you are incapable of doing so yourself. So marriage is not needed to be allowed to make these decisions.
 
Texashonor said:
Every argument has to have a principle to it so my question is this... Allowing gay marriage benefits gays in what way?
Click to expand...

Here's a better principle:

In America, the burden is on the state to justify why my choice should be illegal. The burden is not on me to justify why it should be legal.
 
Texashonor said:
•Visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility.

first one is a hospital rule not a Federal law and not all hospitals adhere to those rules that is an assumption not a fact.

•Making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment.

Just as you can assign someone other then your spouse to make medical decisions for you so can you also have a legal document that gives someone the ability to make medical decisions if you are incapable of doing so yourself. So marriage is not needed to be allowed to make these decisions.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of hospitals use these rules and it's actually a matter of law in most states.

Marriage is technically the only way to do this but it's the fastest and easiest. Tell heterosexual couples they have to hire a lawyer before they get to make those decisions, see how they react.

Why are you trying to poke holes in the benefits of marriage? They clearly exist, and are clearly being denies to homosexual couples. Does it matter that some of them might not be large benefits in every case?
 
@ Deuce

there are not as many Pros as there are Cons simple fact and the second argument goes to if you agree with Gays then how can you make Polygamy illegal. as long as things are consensual then why have them illegal?
 
Texashonor said:
@ Deuce

there are not as many Pros as there are Cons simple fact and the second argument goes to if you agree with Gays then how can you make Polygamy illegal. as long as things are consensual then why have them illegal?
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that polygamous marriages do not fit in the current legal framework for marriage. It would require a re-writing of all of the laws concerning marriage for polygamy to work legally. Not so with same sex marriage.
 
cite me that law in most states that is simply not true.

the piece of paper is a very common one if you go to a law firm you would in most cases not need to even see a lawyer unless they were hustling you and trying to make you pay for time. The piece is very similar to the "power of attorney" paperwork so would take less time and less paperwork then a marriage license.

Yes it does matter because if there is no advantage a disadvantage or simply a marginal advantage then you have to take into account the Cons as well.
 
wolfsgirl said:
Except for the fact that polygamous marriages do not fit in the current legal framework for marriage. It would require a re-writing of all of the laws concerning marriage for polygamy to work legally. Not so with same sex marriage.
Click to expand...


when you say legal framework you are arguing the tax side of things, most polygamists are more about the religious aspect of the marriage then they are about the taxes they would be happy if they could simply have a religious ceremony to signify there marriage without being put in jail.
 
Texashonor said:
@ Deuce

there are not as many Pros as there are Cons simple fact and the second argument goes to if you agree with Gays then how can you make Polygamy illegal. as long as things are consensual then why have them illegal?
Click to expand...

um how's that a simple fact?

and don't we have any objections to polygamy other then its not how we currently do things?

if so maybe that's how

if not

why should it be illegal?
 
Texashonor said:
cite me that law in most states that is simply not true.

the piece of paper is a very common one if you go to a law firm you would in most cases not need to even see a lawyer unless they were hustling you and trying to make you pay for time. The piece is very similar to the "power of attorney" paperwork so would take less time and less paperwork then a marriage license.

Yes it does matter because if there is no advantage a disadvantage or simply a marginal advantage then you have to take into account the Cons as well.
Click to expand...

who are you replying to?
 
Texashonor said:
cite me that law in most states that is simply not true.

the piece of paper is a very common one if you go to a law firm you would in most cases not need to even see a lawyer unless they were hustling you and trying to make you pay for time. The piece is very similar to the "power of attorney" paperwork so would take less time and less paperwork then a marriage license.

Yes it does matter because if there is no advantage a disadvantage or simply a marginal advantage then you have to take into account the Cons as well.
Click to expand...

and thus its ok to not let black people drink from a certain water fountain as long as they can get a drink near buy

what are the cons?
 
Texashonor said:
when you say legal framework you are arguing the tax side of things, most polygamists are more about the religious aspect of the marriage then they are about the taxes they would be happy if they could simply have a religious ceremony to signify there marriage without being put in jail.
Click to expand...

seems wrong and illegal to put people in jail for being married to multiple people in only a religious sense
 
blarg said:
um how's that a simple fact?

and don't we have any objections to polygamy other then its not how we currently do things?

if so maybe that's how


if not

why should it be illegal?
Click to expand...
Because it is true we can sit here and debate it all you want that's why i'm here, you can argue anything such as why cant we marry animals or why cant we have concubines... everything under the sun can be can be justifiable but again is comes to principle why do gay want to be "married" you have brought up a few things that we have broken down and seen no advantage or a separate route that can be taken to obtain the same thing in a manner that is as easy or easier then being married.
 
blarg said:
and thus its ok to not let black people drink from a certain water fountain as long as they can get a drink near buy

what are the cons?
Click to expand...

there can be a list just as you posted but here are the ones id like to debate.

1) If Gay marriage were legalized then if a church were to deny a marriage because it was against there beliefs then they would lose there "nonprofit" business license.

2) In a military sense if you allowed gays to marry people would all be married to be allowed off post housing and BAH along with many other things which then needs to be changed and it couldn't be just changed for gays it would restructure the entire format of BaH and make it less accessible to the military as a whole.
 
Texashonor said:
Because it is true we can sit here and debate it all you want that's why i'm here, you can argue anything such as why cant we marry animals or why cant we have concubines... everything under the sun can be can be justifiable but again is comes to principle why do gay want to be "married" you have brought up a few things that we have broken down and seen no advantage or a separate route that can be taken to obtain the same thing in a manner that is as easy or easier then being married.
Click to expand...

what makes you say its true?

what makes gay marriage lead to any of that stuff?

you see no advantage to equality? and no reason why hetero sexual couples want to marry ?

not always easer or as secure as marriage
 
Texashonor said:
when you say legal framework you are arguing the tax side of things, most polygamists are more about the religious aspect of the marriage then they are about the taxes they would be happy if they could simply have a religious ceremony to signify there marriage without being put in jail.
Click to expand...

Not only taxes, but medical decisions, inheritance, immigration, military housing and benefits, social security, etc.

No one in this country can be jailed for having a private ceremony. The only way you will be jailed is if you fraudulently claim that you are legally married for government purposes.
Look at Cody and his sister wives. They are on tv telling everyone that they are married, they have even shown footage of their wedding ceremonies, yet they are not in jail.
 
Texashonor said:
there can be a list just as you posted but here are the ones id like to debate.

1) If Gay marriage were legalized then if a church were to deny a marriage because it was against there beliefs then they would lose there "nonprofit" business license.

2) In a military sense if you allowed gays to marry people would all be married to be allowed off post housing and BAH along with many other things which then needs to be changed and it couldn't be just changed for gays it would restructure the entire format of BaH and make it less accessible to the military as a whole.
Click to expand...

1 is not true if the running some business serve not related to there religion then they might have some problems but no one can force a church to marry some one against its will

I cant go into a Mormon temple with my girlfriend and demand to be married not even if were both believers

no one is going to punish or force that church to marry me to any one

2 ) if the military lets very female solder have a sham marriage to a fellow male one there just going to have to find a way to root out the exploiters or offer equality

surly there all involved in that kind of scam or else why would you say all of are unmarred male troops are going to marry one another
 
Texashonor said:
there can be a list just as you posted but here are the ones id like to debate.

1) If Gay marriage were legalized then if a church were to deny a marriage because it was against there beliefs then they would lose there "nonprofit" business license.

2) In a military sense if you allowed gays to marry people would all be married to be allowed off post housing and BAH along with many other things which then needs to be changed and it couldn't be just changed for gays it would restructure the entire format of BaH and make it less accessible to the military as a whole.
Click to expand...

1. not true. Churches already decide who can and who can't get married in their churches. Churches deny ceremonies based on the religion of the couple, some deny ceremonies to divorced people, some even deny ceremonies based on the race of the couple.

2. Nor so, if you currently have to be legally married to get military housing or benefits, then changing the gender of the people in the marriage changes nothing. A female married to a male gets housing and benefits, a male married to a female gets housing and benefits, a male married to a mal gets housing and benefits, a female married to a female gets housing and benefits. The gender of the two people has no bearing on the rules.
 
blarg said:
1 is not true if the running some business serve not related to there religion then they might have some problems but no one can force a church to marry some one against its will

I cant go into a Mormon temple with my girlfriend and demand to be married not even if were both believers

no one is going to punish or force that church to marry me to any one

2 ) if the military lets very female solder have a sham marriage to a fellow male one there just going to have to find a way to root out the exploiters or offer equality

surly there all involved in that kind of scam or else why would you say all of are unmarred male troops are going to marry one another
Click to expand...

even for me that needs work


1 is not true if they are running some business with services not related to there religion then they might have some problems but no one can force a church to marry some one against its will

I cant go into a Mormon temple with my girlfriend and demand to be married not even if were both believers

no one is going to punish or force that church to marry me to any one

2 ) if the military lets very female solder have a sham marriage to a fellow male one there just going to have to find a way to root out the exploiters or offer equality

surly there all involved in that kind of scam or else why would you say all of are unmarred male troops are going to marry one another
 
Texashonor said:
when you say legal framework you are arguing the tax side of things, most polygamists are more about the religious aspect of the marriage then they are about the taxes they would be happy if they could simply have a religious ceremony to signify there marriage without being put in jail.
Click to expand...

Then you're talking about two different things.

There's a difference between saying:

1) Making personal religious ceremonies and arrangements of polygamous marriages legal to be entered into

and

2) Making polygamous marriages legal as federal law.

The later would be akin to what's being argued with regards to same sex marriage. Same Sex religious marriages and arrangements are already legal. What's being argued for is federal/state official recognition of that marriage as a matter of law.

Allowing polygamous individuals to enter into a private, non-legally binding agreement on the basis of a religious grounds is an entirely different discussion to one suggesting the Government allowed polygamists marriages in the same fashion it allows marriage as a matter of law currently.

And with such an argument, there are a plethora of differences within the contexts of the arguments for and against comparitive to the arguments for/against same sex marriage...which is why equating them as direct analogs in this fashion is foolish.
 
Texashonor said:
1) If Gay marriage were legalized then if a church were to deny a marriage because it was against there beliefs then they would lose there "nonprofit" business license.
Click to expand...

Gay Marriage is already legal in some states. Do you have evidence that any churches in these states have lost their "nonprofit" business license based on denying to perform a marriage ceremony for those that are against their belief?

If not, you're simply making a claim with no backing and demanding people prove a negative which is a poor form of debate.

If so, please present the links and then we could adequettely debate it as you desire.
 
Shadow Serious said:
We are? Does everyone know this?

As long as it is agreed to that marriage is more than a sort of contract that is desirable for personal and social reasons I'm O.K.

And to think that this was just discovered in the past decade or so and is causing such contention.
Click to expand...

Everyone should know this, however some choose to stay ignorant of facts. Some want others to abide by their view of marriage because they feel they somehow own the right to exclusively define marriage for everyone.

Personal marriage is whatever the couple wants it to be and makes of it. Legal marriage is a legal recognition of kinship provided by a legal contract that helps to protect the two people involved from others and even each other in many ways.

Actually, it was discovered long ago, it was simply acknowledged as having deeper implications about a decade ago.
 
Texashonor said:
cite me that law in most states that is simply not true.

the piece of paper is a very common one if you go to a law firm you would in most cases not need to even see a lawyer unless they were hustling you and trying to make you pay for time. The piece is very similar to the "power of attorney" paperwork so would take less time and less paperwork then a marriage license.

Yes it does matter because if there is no advantage a disadvantage or simply a marginal advantage then you have to take into account the Cons as well.
Click to expand...

There is no legal contract that is simpler or cheaper that gives as much legal protection and recognition than the marriage license. Nothing. It is a medical POA, limited POA, legal kinship recognition document (similar in manner to a birth certificate or adoption record), shared asset agreement, and so much more all in one simple document for a single one-time fee.
 
blarg said:
1 is not true if the running some business serve not related to there religion then they might have some problems but no one can force a church to marry some one against its will

I cant go into a Mormon temple with my girlfriend and demand to be married not even if were both believers

no one is going to punish or force that church to marry me to any one

2 ) if the military lets very female solder have a sham marriage to a fellow male one there just going to have to find a way to root out the exploiters or offer equality

surly there all involved in that kind of scam or else why would you say all of are unmarred male troops are going to marry one another
Click to expand...

The military currently roots out fraudulant marriages. They are one of the few government agencies that do (they may be one of the few that legally can given privacy rights). Male/female couples now hook up in marriage for bennies. They are generally referred to as "contract marriages". Now, it is rare because most people figure they either get BAH anyway (most are eligible by E-5 or E-6, depending on the branch) or they figure its not worth the risk since the person could always claim a legitimate marriage and take good portions of your money from a divorce. That little bit of BAH (which goes to your housing costs anyway, particularly if you weren't eligible for BAH prior to the marriage since most commands require E-5 and below that are married to live in housing and housing gets all of your BAH automatically) is nothing compared to being tied down in a marriage you have to pretend to. Plus, you can get into trouble for adultery if you are married in such a marriage and sleeping with other people and caught. Doing this sort of thing with someone of the same sex would be even more risky since they could easily look and see how many people knew the person or suspected they were gay (most didn't exactly hide it) prior to the marriage. It would look mighty suspicious.
 
Texashonor said:
when you say legal framework you are arguing the tax side of things, most polygamists are more about the religious aspect of the marriage then they are about the taxes they would be happy if they could simply have a religious ceremony to signify there marriage without being put in jail.
Click to expand...

They can do that. How do you think the FLDS do it? They have a religious ceremony that makes them married without actually getting the legal bennies from it. Heck, same sex couples have been doing such things for decades (does no one watch Friends, there was a lesbian wedding in the first season, before any state in our nation legalized same sex marriage). The issue at hand is legal recognition, not personal/religious recognition of marriages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom