• 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!

Alaska ban on same-sex marriage ruled unconstitutional

roguenuke said:
Actually, I want a balanced government system, where the most important thing is balancing individual rights to the safety, security, and welfare of the people as a group, society.

I don't need marriage to be in the Constitution. It is protected because of the 9th and 14th Amendments. You can argue against these facts til you are blue in the face, but the SCOTUS has already ruled on marriage several times, defending it as a right.
Click to expand...

Again, that is your opinion, but until you can show me a gay gene then it is a personal choice issue and personal choice isn't a protect civil right
 
Conservative said:
The vast majority in my state do not support gay marriage and since marriage is a state issue that is where it resides and TX will not be authorizing same sex marriages. Why would you discriminate against the people of TX?
Click to expand...

You really need to recheck your information there. The "vast majority" in Texas does not oppose same sex marriage. In fact, there are more people who support it in Texas now than that oppose it, and support is only growing.

In heart of Texas, support grows for same-sex marriage
 
Conservative said:
Again, that is your opinion, but until you can show me a gay gene then it is a personal choice issue and personal choice isn't a protect civil right
Click to expand...

Nothing I said has anything to do with sexuality being controlled by your genes. Personal choices absolutely are protected as civil rights. If it is a choice to marry someone of the same sex or opposite sex (which it really is), then it is also a choice to marry someone of the same race or a different race. The Lovings did not have to marry each other, to be with each other. They simply chose to.

But even more so than that, religion is a choice and is absolutely protected.
 
Peter King said:
It is not a choice issue, being gay is not a choice.
Click to expand...

It actually doesn't matter if it is a choice or not (I'm sure it isn't, but that's beside the point). Choices are still protected when it comes to civil rights, no matter what he thinks or others think. Religion is most definitely a choice and it is absolutely protected when it comes to civil rights. Being in an interracial or interfaith marriage is a choice, still protected when it comes to civil rights. These reasons go into why being gay is still protected when it comes to civil rights.
 
roguenuke said:
You really need to recheck your information there. The "vast majority" in Texas does not oppose same sex marriage. In fact, there are more people who support it in Texas now than that oppose it, and support is only growing.

In heart of Texas, support grows for same-sex marriage
Click to expand...

Then let the people decide. could it be just like North Carolina where the people spoke, you didn't like it and went to the courts to overturn the will of the people? We are a nation of laws and you cannot seem to comprehend that reality.
 
Conservative said:
We are a nation of laws and you cannot seem to comprehend that reality.
Click to expand...

Yes, you're right.

You are a nation of laws and that's why when a law violates peoples rights, other laws take precedent such as the 14th Amendment.
 
Conservative said:
19 states authorize gay marriage, only 31 more to go, go for it. This is really a slippery slope and violates the country the founders created, a small limited central govt. This is a state issue, what next on the leftwing agenda to destroy states' rights?
Click to expand...

You need to look again. 30 states currently allow same sex couples to marry, with another one that has issued marriage licenses but may have a stay pending an appeal (Alaska). Five more are likely to go down in the next few weeks.

Same-sex marriage in the United States

So that is 19-20 to go, as of right now. The majority of states recognize same sex couples as legally married.
 
roguenuke said:
Nothing I said has anything to do with sexuality being controlled by your genes. Personal choices absolutely are protected as civil rights. If it is a choice to marry someone of the same sex or opposite sex (which it really is), then it is also a choice to marry someone of the same race or a different race. The Lovings did not have to marry each other, to be with each other. They simply chose to.

But even more so than that, religion is a choice and is absolutely protected.
Click to expand...

No, personal choice has never been a protect civil right, EVER. Personal choice is simply that, your decision to do what you want regardless of the law. Loving's ruling specifically stated this was about race and race is protected in the Constitution. You want gay rights to be protected, put them in the Constitution. Until then stop having justices overturn the will of the people.
 
roguenuke said:
You need to look again. 30 states currently allow same sex couples to marry, with another one that has issued marriage licenses but may have a stay pending an appeal (Alaska). Five more are likely to go down in the next few weeks.

Same-sex marriage in the United States

So that is 19-20 to go, as of right now. The majority of states recognize same sex couples as legally married.
Click to expand...

19 of those states were forced by justices. Is that how you want this country run?
 
Conservative said:
Gays have the same rights as I have, they can marry anyone of the opposite sex. You continue to make this a civil rights issue and being gay isn't a civil right just like being straight isn't a civil right. It is a personal choice issue. Now you want gay marriage, sell it to 50 states. What are you afraid of?
Click to expand...

I do not have the same right you do, to marry a man. That violates my civil rights as a woman, no matter if I am gay or straight.
 
Conservative said:
19 of those states were forced by justices. Is that how you want this country run?
Click to expand...

Over a dozen states were forced by justices to allow interracial couples to marry. You better believe that I want our country to run that way when states are attempting to deny people rights because simple majorities aren't comfortable with some people getting married.
 
Conservative said:
So then there isn't an issue, solved in Loving vs. Va. Amazing how this ruling is what you want it to be when the actual ruling is all about race, not SSM
Click to expand...

They dismissed the arguments you are making. That's why people are laughing at the arguments you are making.

"Everyone has the same right to marry someone of the opposite gender!" I mean, really? You think that's something that withstands the equal protection clause?
 
Conservative said:
No, personal choice has never been a protect civil right, EVER. Personal choice is simply that, your decision to do what you want regardless of the law. Loving's ruling specifically stated this was about race and race is protected in the Constitution. You want gay rights to be protected, put them in the Constitution. Until then stop having justices overturn the will of the people.
Click to expand...

What the hell do you call religion? It is a personal choice. In fact, interracial marriage is a personal choice.

And if you are basing Loving off of race, then same sex marriage is being restricted by sex, not sexuality. Since your sex/gender is not a personal choice, that means that it is protected, according to your logic.
 
Conservative said:
Need to have the courts do what you cannot sell the people? You don't have a problem with that?
Click to expand...

Worked with interracial marriage. 16 states and over 70% of the people in the nation were against interracial marriage when the Loving decision was made. So obviously you don't have an issue with it either if you support Loving.
 
Conservative said:
No, personal choice has never been a protect civil right, EVER. Personal choice is simply that, your decision to do what you want regardless of the law. Loving's ruling specifically stated this was about race and race is protected in the Constitution. You want gay rights to be protected, put them in the Constitution. Until then stop having justices overturn the will of the people.
Click to expand...


Really?


Here are some examples:

Religion is a personal choice, Religion is a protected Civil Right.

What you wish to say is a personal choice, Free Speech is a protected Civil Right.

Coloreds could marry coloreds and whites could marry whites - the state claimed they were treated equally, however the CHOICE to marry someone of a different race is a protected Civil Right​




>>>>
 
Conservative said:
Then let the people decide. could it be just like North Carolina where the people spoke, you didn't like it and went to the courts to overturn the will of the people? We are a nation of laws and you cannot seem to comprehend that reality.
Click to expand...

I've already presented the case in NC. Just like with interracial marriage, NC had to have its ban/restriction overturned because it was unconstitutional. The federal courts are there to overturn the will of the people when that will is being used to oppress other people for no reason other than "we don't like them".
 
roguenuke said:
I do not have the same right you do, to marry a man. That violates my civil rights as a woman, no matter if I am gay or straight.
Click to expand...

What part of marriage not being a civil right don't you understand? Your state voted over 60% so you just have a problem being in a true minority. I suggest moving.
 
roguenuke said:
I've already presented the case in NC. Just like with interracial marriage, NC had to have its ban/restriction overturned because it was unconstitutional. The federal courts are there to overturn the will of the people when that will is being used to oppress other people for no reason other than "we don't like them".
Click to expand...

You are going to find very few people believing that not being able to marry is oppression. Wow, project much?
 
Jetboogieman said:
People who support discrimination would say that wouldn't they...

Well I wouldn't worry about it buddy, it's already over.
Click to expand...

Great, then no need for more of these useless threads. The very small percentage of gay people in America vs the total population must be extremely ecstatic
 
Conservative said:
Great, then no need for more of these useless threads. The very small percentage of gay people in America vs the total population must be extremely ecstatic
Click to expand...

The total population according to polls has come around to support SSM.

It's already in the works, it will be the law of the land.

So, quite frankly you discriminatory ideologue, suck it.
 
Conservative said:
Great, then no need for more of these useless threads. The very small percentage of gay people in America vs the total population must be extremely ecstatic
Click to expand...


The total population (excluding those who are themselves homosexual) are not all against equal treatment under the law for homosexuals.




>>>>
 
Conservative said:
What part of marriage not being a civil right don't you understand? Your state voted over 60% so you just have a problem being in a true minority. I suggest moving.
Click to expand...

A civil right is where someone is being treated differently by a law based on a specific characteristic of that person. It is not about the law itself.

My state had a voter turnout of only around 20% of those registered to vote. It was because they set it up during a Republican primary. That fact in itself shows that it was a purely political move. I wasn't even in the state at the time (I was in San Diego, with my husband, who had orders there).

I don't need to move. The federal courts took care of the issue. Same sex marriage is legal here. Same sex couples are getting married and that will not stop.
 
Conservative said:
You are going to find very few people believing that not being able to marry is oppression. Wow, project much?
Click to expand...

Actually, I can find a lot.

But at the very least, it is unfair treatment, which is something that the Constitution protects us from when it comes to the laws, which marriage is.
 
Jetboogieman said:
The total population according to polls has come around to support SSM.

It's already in the works, it will be the law of the land.

So, quite frankly you discriminatory ideologue, suck it.
Click to expand...

Since polls matter so much to you then why did 19 states have to have their bans overturned by un-elected justices? Seems the will of the people in those states wouldn't require a judge to overturn the ban which of course was created by the people
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom