Marriage and Law

[FlyLikeAnEagle]

My OP has nothing to do with morals.

The point, for those that missed it, is that legal marriage is a request one makes of others to honor their union with their approval. It is much like asking a girl's parents to approve of your marriage - you do not have a right to it. And because you don't have a right to everyone's approval, people can not deny you of rights by not granting it.

Nobody in the US is trying to tell people with whom they may associate with intimately. If they were, they would be violating their rights. Some people are making the personal choice to refuse to endorse the intimacy of others - doing so denies nobody of any rights.

You keep talking about rights, where does these rights come from?

 

[dukeofbaja]

When you turn 18 you are afforded full right's,,,I don't or did not ask permision,,from there parent's. We are a free society. You must be living on some Tribe somewhere in La La Land.
I guess if your jewish or Racked into money that's your way of thinking,But In reality 18 you are FREE to chose your own free will and destiny.

If you are Jewish, you become a man/woman at 13 and get a great party!

 

[mindphuk]

"Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."
Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia#cite_note-0

 

[fdd2blk]

you guys really don't get what he's saying? kinda like a drivers license, it's a privilege, not a right. why do judges have to grant divorces? you have no "right" to divorce, it has to be decided.

come-on, even i get it.

 

[mindphuk]

you guys really don't get what he's saying? kinda like a drivers license, it's a privilege, not a right. why do judges have to grant divorces? you have no "right" to divorce, it has to be decided.

Absolutely false in many states.

 

[dukeofbaja]

SO fdd, if you had a gun to your head and had to cast a yea or nay vote on gay marriage, what would your vote be? Yea (gay marriage allowed) or nay (gay marriage not allowed)?

 

[fdd2blk]

SO fdd, if you had a gun to your head and had to cast a yea or nay vote on gay marriage, what would your vote be? Yea (gay marriage allowed) or nay (gay marriage not allowed)?

that has nothing to do with anything.






you APPLY for marriage license. it is NOT a right.

pretty fucking simple.

 

[FlyLikeAnEagle]

you guys really don't get what he's saying? kinda like a drivers license, it's a privilege, not a right. why do judges have to grant divorces? you have no "right" to divorce, it has to be decided.

come-on, even i get it.

Because a legal contract between two people is created when two people are married, and since this contract involves the state a judge is needed to break that contract. And yes, marriage is a right, states are proscribed from absolutely prohibiting marriage in the absence of a valid reason otherwise they would be in violation of Equal Protection.

 

[dukeofbaja]

that has nothing to do with anything.






you APPLY for marriage license. it is NOT a right.

pretty fucking simple.

C'mon now, you must be capable of forming a thought on this contentious debate. WHat is it now? Yea or nay?

 

[RickWhite]

"If you had a gun to your head" - WTF kind of question is that?

I can see how there could be legal arguments regarding race. The law says that anything available to the public can not be withheld on the basis of race. The legal definition of marriage has never contained a condition that the man and the woman be of the same race, just that they be one man and one woman.

Because the legal definition of marriage specifies a man and woman, the definition would need to be changed before same sex marriage could be possible. To ask the public to accept the marriage of people of different races is not the same as asking them to change the fundamental meaning of marriage.

Moreover, Gays can achieve full protection of law simply by drafting a contract that would be tantamount to marriage but without the title. Or, States could enact civil unions that would be on par with marriage without actually re-defining marriage and forcing public approval.

Make no mistake about it, the the same sex marriage debate is not about rights. It is about an attempt to force the public at large to put the public seal of approval on the gay lifestyle. That is in essence all marriage is - it is a public seal of approval.

 

[fdd2blk]

C'mon now, you must be capable of forming a thought on this contentious debate. WHat is it now? Yea or nay?

prop 8 babe, i voted on it and it's none of your business which box i checked.

you gonna shot me now?

 

[Hayduke]

If someone wanted to marry their hamster...I would give them the seal of approval...grant them the privilege...hell give em a tax break...I don't care!

As long as you are not hurting anyone...and the hamster seems to enjoy it...I would go so far as to say you have the RIGHT!...None of my business...not my hamster.

I have been married twice...I feel EXTREMELY privileged to no longer be with those crazy bitches.

Getting a marriage license has NOTHING to do with the public sanctioning the union...It ONLY has to do with a county clerk collecting REVENUE...it is a tax.

 

[BadDog40]

Getting a marriage license has NOTHING to do with the public sanctioning the union...It ONLY has to do with a county clerk collecting REVENUE...it is a tax.

That and it makes divorce attorneys, child advocates, and parenting class holders rich.

 

[Juggalomidgetfahker]

My view on it is that since judaeism was the 1st to mention the concept of marriage and it is to create a union between a man and a woman and the two become one flesh....so it isn't for gays....especially since their same texts say it is a sin to be gay so God obviously wouldn't be blessing that union anyway. And the govt accepted a church belief as reality since everyone was a Christian at the founding of this country....there really can never be a separation of church and state because ones faith is the basis from which all descisions are made and encompass ever aspect of who and what you are...

So the benefits should be for everyone but it shouldn't be based on marriage, it should be based on being an adult American instead.

 

[fdd2blk]

My view on it is that since judaeism was the 1st to mention the concept of marriage and it is to create a union between a man and a woman and the two become one flesh....so it isn't for gays....especially since their same texts say it is a sin to be gay so God obviously wouldn't be blessing that union anyway. And the govt accepted a church belief as reality since everyone was a Christian at the founding of this country....there really can never be a separation of church and state because ones faith is the basis from which all descisions are made and encompass ever aspect of who and what you are...

So the benefits should be for everyone but it shouldn't be based on marriage, it should be based on being an adult American instead.

and with this i can close the thread.

 

[Hayduke]

and with this i can close the thread.

Why?

 

[upnorth2505]

It is getting so boring listening to certain posters bash gays with their puesdo science and philosophical trash talk.

It is hate speach. Plain and simple. I do not like it, but if people really get a sick thrill out of it, then that is their right.

 

[fdd2blk]

It is getting so boring listening to certain posters bash gays with their puesdo science and philosophical trash talk.

It is hate speach. Plain and simple. I do not like it, but if people really get a sick thrill out of it, then that is their right.

about as old as listening to people whine about being victims.

 

[Hayduke]

It is getting so boring listening to certain posters bash gays with their puesdo science and philosophical trash talk.

It is hate speach. Plain and simple. I do not like it, but if people really get a sick thrill out of it, then that is their right.

about as old as listening to people whine about being victims.

See...this sh!t's fun!

 

[Johnnyorganic]

A lot of people want to know, how someone could believe that Gays should not have the same rights as everyone else when it comes to marriage.

But what are our rights with regard to marriage? For that matter, in what way is marriage a legal issue?

My answer is that marriage is not a right. Nowhere in the Constitution or elsewhere is this right guaranteed. After all, in order to be considered married, we must apply for and be granted a license and then only a duly empowered person can declare it valid.

So, my question is, why do we need any act of law to declare ourselves married? Suppose one wishes to declare their self married to their dog. Who is going to interfere? In actuality anyone can declare themselves to be married to any other person, thing, group off people, etc. There is no prohibition of any kind on this act.

Now, to be considered legally married is another subject. To be considered legally married one must make a request of other people - in this case the Government. And what is the Government in America besides the representative body of the American people. That is why legal proceedings often begin with "the people vs John Doe."

So, any time anyone requests a legal marriage, they are making a request for acknowledgment from the people - they are asking the rest of us to do something on their behalf. They are asking the people to bestow upon their union the public seal of approval.

That is really all marriage is and it is not something anyone has a right to.

Marriage is not a right.

But if we are discussing rights in relation to marriage the focus of the discussion is Equal Protection Under the Law.

So the question, properly framed is: Do Homosexuals have a right to Equal Protection Under the Law when it comes to the legal contract called marriage?

I believe they do.