• 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
winston53660 said:
Well gays are getting married in all 50 states and some of them recognize them.
Click to expand...

Then there's nothing left to fight for. They want to get married, and according to you they are. So that's it, pack up and go home, the issue is resolved.
 
Jerry said:
Then there's nothing left to fight for. They want to get married, and according to you they are. So that's it, pack up and go home, the issue is resolved.
Click to expand...

There is more to it and you know that. People buy ahouse together build it work on it and then one dies. In a heterosexual marriage the state recognizes a right for the surviving spouse.
 
winston53660 said:
There is more to it and you know that.
Click to expand...

That's why I ****ed with you ;)

winston53660 said:
People buy ahouse together build it work on it and then one dies.
Click to expand...

The house now belongs to the surviving person on the deed. If there are no survivors on the deed, wills are pulled out. If the will doesn't resolve ownership, then we go to automatic inheritance.

winston53660 said:
In a heterosexual marriage the state recognizes a right for the surviving spouse.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. That's one of the many myths about marriage perpetuated by pro-gm to farm votes. It's simply not true.

If the surviving spouse's name is not on the deed, they have no claim to it, hetero marriage or otherwise.

Marriage doesn't even enter into the discussion, as even business partners who would never dream of marrying each-other can buy a house together and the same would be true.

If a gay couple bought the hose together (which means both names are on the deed), the survivor still owns the house when the other dies. There is nothing about that person's death with reverses the transaction.

If one person's name is on the deed and the other is not, but the will leaves the house to the gay partner, that's who it now belongs to.

***
The typical example pro-gm uses is where only one of the gay couple's names is on the deed, dies, his family wants to claim the house, and the survivor doesn't have a leg to stand on because his name is not on the deed nor is there a will.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
The typical example pro-gm uses is where only one of the gay couple's names is on the deed, dies, his family wants to claim the house, and the survivor doesn't have a leg to stand on because his name is not on the deed nor is there a will.
Click to expand...

This is the pro gay marraige stance I don't buy into. Put your spouse on the deed. If you want your homosexual spouse to be ale to call the shots at the hospital grant them power of attorney.

The non recognized married couples (both hetero and hom) that run into problems is when they rely on the hope that the state will interpret their obvious love for each other as a binding legal contrat and FAIL to take the necessary steps to make sure their spouses are legally recognized to make decisions and/or claim ownership with the proper contracts/will/power of attorney/etc.

I fully support gay marriage. I don't support laziness and incompetence.
 
Jerry said:
That's why I ****ed with you ;)



The house now belongs to the surviving person on the deed. If there are no survivors on the deed, wills are pulled out. If the will doesn't resolve ownership, then we go to automatic inheritance.



No, it doesn't. That's one of the many myths about marriage perpetuated by pro-gm to farm votes. It's simply not true.

If the surviving spouse's name is not on the deed, they have no claim to it, hetero marriage or otherwise.

Marriage doesn't even enter into the discussion, as even business partners who would never dream of marrying each-other can buy a house together and the same would be true.

If a gay couple bought the hose together (which means both names are on the deed), the survivor still owns the house when the other dies. There is nothing about that person's death with reverses the transaction.

If one person's name is on the deed and the other is not, but the will leaves the house to the gay partner, that's who it now belongs to.

***
The typical example pro-gm uses is where only one of the gay couple's names is on the deed, dies, his family wants to claim the house, and the survivor doesn't have a leg to stand on because his name is not on the deed nor is there a will.
Click to expand...

I was talking about dead not divorce.
 
winston53660 said:
I was talking about dead not divorce.
Click to expand...

There should be a will. I'm 28 and I have a will.

Maybe it's the businessman in me but I leave nothing to assumptions. If it's not written down and agreed upon it doesn't exist.
 
Last edited:
Gibberish said:
There should be a will. I'm 28 and I have a will.

Maybe it's the businessman in me but I leave nothing to assumptions. If it's not written down and agreed upon it doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

Marriage does bestow certain rights that a will well not. Being legally related means that a spouse can inherit the family house tax free. In the 6 figure range this can mean a lot to people of the age that are not applicable for employment anymore.
 
Gibberish said:
There should be a will. I'm 28 and I have a will.

Maybe it's the businessman in me but I leave nothing to assumptions. If it's not written down and agreed upon it doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

If a house transfers ownership without a will, the receiver may be liable for income tax.

Remember when Oprah's audience was caught off guard when the fed told them they had to pay taxes on the cars she gave away, and they were now in a higher tax-bracket due to the value of the car?

Same thing.

The presence of a will invokes inheritance laws, which can still carry fees, but not a severe.
 
Last edited:
I have to say no. The issue of who can marry who is a State issue with each state having different laws. The 14th Amendment prohibits laws that discriminate over surface issues like race. Gender is not a difference that is only on the surface but is inextricably differential at both physical and physical and even spiritual levels. Therefore the argument that we cannot prohibit the marriage of same gender couples is false at least through the 14th Admendment.

Now we do have and Equal Faith and Credit Clause for such things as marriage but that is in part governed by Congress and would have the final say about it irregardless of what the Supreme Court may say. But this is not a Constitutional Right but is the process of making regular the licences between the States.
 
winston53660 said:
Okay fine make your own private world. See if I or anyone else cares. In the mean time I will stick with reality.
Click to expand...
Again:
I see you recognize that you cannot defend your position.
 
Read the 14th. It doesn't say right. It says privilege. If marriage is a privilege then the states can not under the 14th amendment deny it. If it is a right. It can not denied either.

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Click to expand...
 
Hatuey said:
Read the 14th. It doesn't say right. It says privilege. If marriage is a privilege then the states can not under the 14th amendment deny it. If it is a right. It can not denied either.
Click to expand...
Yes... but the question is:
Is Gay Marriage a Constitutional Right?
 
Goobieman said:
Yes... but the question is:
Is Gay Marriage a Constitutional Right?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. Neither States nor the federal government have the power to deny it to citizens be it a privilege OR a constitutional right. Unless the states decide to do away with marriage all together then the fact that they call it a privilege would indicate to me that under the constitution they have no grounds to deny it to gay couples.
 
Last edited:
Hatuey said:
Irrelevant. Neither States nor the federal government have the power to deny it to citizens if it is a privilege OR a constitutional right.
Click to expand...

Well they seem to think they do, and have.
 
Hatuey said:
Irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant?
Its the topic under discusion.
See: title of topic

Your quotation of the 14th amendment sheds no light on the issue.
 
Blackdog said:
Well they seem to think they do, and have.
Click to expand...

They also made Jim Crow laws. You place too much faith on this states rights bull****.
 
Hatuey said:
They also made Jim Crow laws. You place too much faith on this states rights bull****.
Click to expand...

No, I am just stating facts.

States rights are one of the core values this nation was founded under.

Of course you seem to like Federal Government involvement and entitlement in every aspect of peoples lives, so oh well.
 
Last edited:
Goobieman said:
Its the topic under discusion.
See: title of topic
Click to expand...

1. If marriage is a right then the States are in violation of the constitution.

2. If marriage is a privilege then the States are in violation of the constitution.

You yourself stated it was a privilege :

Goobieman said:
This, alone, means that marriage is a privilege, not a right, as rights exist independent of an act of creation by the government.
Click to expand...

The fact that you choose to define gay marriage as being any different than marriage is a weak distraction. No different than trying to create a difference between interracial marriage and white-white marriage or black-black marriage.
 
Blackdog said:
No, I am just stating facts.

States rights are one of the core values this nation was founded under.
Click to expand...

And it's the reason we had a civil war, Jim crow laws, abuses of the 1st amendment, lynchings of whites, blacks, Asians etc. Forgive me if I don't respect those 'values'.

Of course you seem to like Federal Government involvement and entitlement in every aspect of peoples lives, so oh well.
Click to expand...

No. I don't buy into the justification that made people slaves. :)
 
Hatuey said:
1. If marriage is a right then the States are in violation of the constitution.

2. If marriage is a privilege then the States are in violation of the constitution.
Click to expand...
This is all irrelevant to the question of if Gay Marriage a Constitutional Right in the U.S. -- the question asked in the poll and thus the topic at hand.

You yourself stated it was a privilege
Click to expand...
Yes, I did, as that was my answer to the question asked by the poll.

The fact that you choose to define gay marriage as being any different than marriage is a weak distraction. No different than trying to create a difference between interracial marriage and white-white marriage or black-black marriage.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant to the topic under consideration.
 
Hatuey said:
And it's the reason we had a civil war, Jim crow laws, abuses of the 1st amendment, lynchings of whites, blacks, Asians etc. Forgive me if I don't respect those 'values'.
Click to expand...

Jim Crow started AFTER the civil war and had nothing to do with it. Lynchings again started AFTER the civil war and again had nothing to do with it.

Slavery was one of many issues that started the Civil war.

You mite want to bone up on some history and leave the afro-centric bull**** at home.

Hatuey said:
No. I don't buy into the justification that made people slaves. :)
Click to expand...

It had nothing to do with it. It was an accepted practice in that time. You are trying to judge them by a practice that was legitimate and legal then.

Nice fallacy argument, nothing more. :2wave:
 
Goobieman said:
This is all irrelevant to the question of if Gay Marriage a Constitutional Right in the U.S. -- the question asked in the poll and thus the topic at hand.

Yes, I did, as that was my answer to the question asked by the poll.

Irrelevant to the topic under consideration.
Click to expand...

Do you not understand that gay marriage is no different than black-black marriage, interracial marriage, white-white marriage etc. and the question on the topic is a distraction? Of course you don't. Because you're part of the distraction and it is your favor to continue this silly game of 'it's not really marriage!'

Defining a particular form of marriage(a contract by two individuals) as 'gay' or 'interracial' does not deny the fact that it is still marriage as proven by Loving V. Virginia. Not only that, regardless of whether you define marriage as a constitutional right or a privilege, the states do not have legal power to deny it.

The OPs question is a distraction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom