• 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!

Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were different?

Would you support a constitutional amendment defining marriage? See below

  • Total voters
    20
F

friday

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
801
Reaction score
196
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The Right has gotten some flack for wanting a constitutional marriage amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. But the GLBT community definitely has a dogmatic definition of marriage in mind as well. It is a social contract between two consenting adults. Even the mention of Polygamy just angers the pro-gay marriage crowd.

So its time for some perspective. If your state legalized gay marriage, and the courts then overturned the ruling and said marriage is only a covenant between one man and one woman, would you support a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a social contract between two consenting adults?
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
The Right has gotten some flack for wanting a constitutional marriage amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. But the GLBT community definitely has a dogmatic definition of marriage in mind as well. It is a social contract between two consenting adults. Even the mention of Polygamy just angers the pro-gay marriage crowd.

So its time for some perspective. If your state legalized gay marriage, and the courts then overturned the ruling and said marriage is only a covenant between one man and one woman, would you support a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a social contract between two consenting adults?
Click to expand...
I would support a constitutional amendment for the government to get out of the marriage business all together, it's just another source of unconstitutional income for the government.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

deltabtry said:
I would support a constitutional amendment for the government to get out of the marriage business all together, it's just another source of unconstitutional income for the government.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100%, but before government gets out of the marriage business, government would have to get out of the redistribution of wealth business with our progressive tax system that creates a marriage penalty.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

I would support it only if the federal government removed all incentivizations for marriage. At that point, I would like it if civil unions were available to all, and that marriage was privatized to the church, at which point any given church can decide whether they want to participate in a marriage or not, regardless of the gender of either party.

For a nation supposedly void of a union between church and state, we sure do try to force people down the aisle to the altar by making it in their best interests on many fronts.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

Indeed, the government should not grant incentives for marriage at all:
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
The Right has gotten some flack for wanting a constitutional marriage amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. But the GLBT community definitely has a dogmatic definition of marriage in mind as well. It is a social contract between two consenting adults. Even the mention of Polygamy just angers the pro-gay marriage crowd.

So its time for some perspective. If your state legalized gay marriage, and the courts then overturned the ruling and said marriage is only a covenant between one man and one woman, would you support a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a social contract between two consenting adults?
Click to expand...

It is highly unlikely a court would rule that way. All the rulings so far indicate otherwise.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

Redress said:
It is highly unlikely a court would rule that way. All the rulings so far indicate otherwise.
Click to expand...

That might be true, but while most courts have overturned gay marriage bans, when the people are given the chance to vote it has always gone in favor of traditional marriage, even in California. So the court victories in favor of gay marriage may be more indicative of where it has been tried, not of complete consensus among all courts in the United States in favor of gay marriage.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

Marriage should be a free reign. A pastor or preist or any religious figurehead should not be forced to marry two women or two men because it conflicts with their religious beliefs or even be forced to let them be married in their church, synagogue, etc. That being said, they should be allowed to be married in any other way. The government has no business in the bedroom.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

DashingAmerican said:
Marriage should be a free reign. A pastor or preist or any religious figurehead should not be forced to marry two women or two men because it conflicts with their religious beliefs or even be forced to let them be married in their church, synagogue, etc. That being said, they should be allowed to be married in any other way. The government has no business in the bedroom.
Click to expand...


I don't think their business really is in bedroom well except to say a man can not rape his wife. Their business is more like in things such as hospital visitation rights.
 
Last edited:
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
That might be true, but while most courts have overturned gay marriage bans, when the people are given the chance to vote it has always gone in favor of traditional marriage, even in California. So the court victories in favor of gay marriage may be more indicative of where it has been tried, not of complete consensus among all courts in the United States in favor of gay marriage.
Click to expand...

Not in NY. 60% of our state supports gay marriage. Marriage should be decided at the state level only. DOMA needs to go out the window and states need to decide on marriage issues. If texas wants to discriminate against its citizens and say only a man and a woman can marry, then so be it.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
That might be true, but while most courts have overturned gay marriage bans, when the people are given the chance to vote it has always gone in favor of traditional marriage, even in California. So the court victories in favor of gay marriage may be more indicative of where it has been tried, not of complete consensus among all courts in the United States in favor of gay marriage.
Click to expand...

The votes have been narrowing, and public opinion continues to go towards SSM. Just because something has happened does not mean it will continue to happen. Further, the courts have been extremely instep on the issue. Under any level of scrutiny, a ban on SSM is going to fail, and strict scrutiny(the highest level) is quite likely. DOMA is the only stumbling block to SSM right now, and I know of no legal expert who thinks it has any chance in the courts. Once DOMA goes down, then just one state without a residency requirement for marriage legalizing SSM means SSM is here to stay.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

Marriage is too tied up with religion. Any definition of it by the government will make some group unhappy. It will impinge on the freedom of religion. There should be a way to set up a relationship between people defined, regulated, documented like what we now call marriage but that is available to any two people that stets up what married people have now in situations like one being hospitalized. People define their relationships anyway, not the government.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

Gargantuan said:
Not in NY. 60% of our state supports gay marriage. Marriage should be decided at the state level only. DOMA needs to go out the window and states need to decide on marriage issues. If texas wants to discriminate against its citizens and say only a man and a woman can marry, then so be it.
Click to expand...

So you are more in line with Michelle Bachmann and Herman Cain on this as opposed to Obama. By the way, DOMA was designed to protect state's rights to self determination on marriage.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

Redress said:
The votes have been narrowing, and public opinion continues to go towards SSM. Just because something has happened does not mean it will continue to happen. Further, the courts have been extremely instep on the issue. Under any level of scrutiny, a ban on SSM is going to fail, and strict scrutiny(the highest level) is quite likely. DOMA is the only stumbling block to SSM right now, and I know of no legal expert who thinks it has any chance in the courts. Once DOMA goes down, then just one state without a residency requirement for marriage legalizing SSM means SSM is here to stay.
Click to expand...

Do you support the government redefining marriage? Or do you think government should get out of marriage?
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
So you are more in line with Michelle Bachmann and Herman Cain on this as opposed to Obama. By the way, DOMA was designed to protect state's rights to self determination on marriage.
Click to expand...


BS every state has recognize another state's heterosexual marriage. DOMA had but one purpose and that is to discriminate against gay citizens.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
So you are more in line with Michelle Bachmann and Herman Cain on this as opposed to Obama. By the way, DOMA was designed to protect state's rights to self determination on marriage.
Click to expand...

No. DOMA was designed to deny SSM. Saying the federal government does not recognize SSM is taking rights away from the states. There is no way to spin that as protecting states rights, and in fact it is failing in the courts due to states rights.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

winston53660 said:
BS every state has recognize another state's heterosexual marriage. DOMA had but one purpose and that is to discriminate against gay citizens.
Click to expand...

Winston, do you discriminate against polygamous marriage?
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
Winston, do you discriminate against polygamous marriage?
Click to expand...


Do you always change goal posts?
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

Redress said:
No. DOMA was designed to deny SSM. Saying the federal government does not recognize SSM is taking rights away from the states. There is no way to spin that as protecting states rights, and in fact it is failing in the courts due to states rights.
Click to expand...

Same question, do you discriminate against polygamous marriage?
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

winston53660 said:
Do you always change goal posts?
Click to expand...


It is a question related directly to this debate. Interesting that you choose not to answer it.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
Do you support the government redefining marriage? Or do you think government should get out of marriage?
Click to expand...

I support the repeal of DOMA(which won't happen until the courts finish doing it, next year, maybe 2). I support SSM being legal and recognized. With NY legalizing SSM, and not having a residency requirement, once DOM A goes away, all gay couples can get married, and once that happens, states will start having to adopt. Further, once people see that SSM married couples are just like any other married couple, resistance to SSM will further decline. SSM is coming, and quickly, and there is no stopping it on any front, the courts, legislatively, or public opinion.

At this point in time the government getting out of marriage is not going to happen, and would be so disruptive that I shudder to think of the consequences if it was tried. Federal benefits of marriage number in the thousands(I forget the actual number, it is mind boggling), state benefits are incredibly high as well. The government is not getting out of marriage.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
Same question, do you discriminate against polygamous marriage?
Click to expand...

I have no opinion on polygamy and it is entirely and 100 % not relevant to SSM.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

Redress said:
I have no opinion on polygamy and it is entirely and 100 % not relevant to SSM.
Click to expand...

So if the government legalized polygamous marriage you would have no problem with it, but you don't feel as compelled to fight for it. Is that accurate?
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
So if the government legalized polygamous marriage you would have no problem with it, but you don't feel as compelled to fight for it. Is that accurate?
Click to expand...

Polygamy is not SSM. Polygamy is a red herring brought out by those against SSM. The two are not the same thing. I am not going to discuss polygamy, bestiality, incest, or any of the other host of red herrings and distractions. If you cannot make your case about SSM without the red herrings, it has already failed.
 
Re: Would you support a constitutional marriage amendment if circumstance were differ

friday said:
So if the government legalized polygamous marriage you would have no problem with it, but you don't feel as compelled to fight for it. Is that accurate?
Click to expand...

Stop comparing polygamy to same sex marriage.
OOOOOH IF YOU WANT A GAY MARRIAGE I WANT A DOG MARRIAGE I WANT TO MARRY MY DOG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom