The Supreme Court and Gay Marriage

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
I would be surprised if the Court views this as a states rights issue in light of Roe v. Wade. In that case they took a states rights issue and broadened it. So I would think they have plenty of precedent to do so here.
 
The evolution of marriage is interesting.

First it was man-woman. But many states prohibited interracial marriage. Now that is allowed. Then the issue was polygamous marriage, but that was disallowed. Now we may have a decision on same sex marriage. Then there is incestuous marriage which may be around the bend (no pun intended). Or marriage of sisters... at any age. Marry babies to men or women has to be considered as well.

I suppose the easy way out is to decide that morality has ceased to exist and allow, under any and all circumstances, for humans to marry in want way possible that they may choose.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
The evolution of marriage is interesting.

First it was man-woman. But many states prohibited interracial marriage. Now that is allowed. Then the issue was polygamous marriage, but that was disallowed. Now we may have a decision on same sex marriage. Then there is incestuous marriage which may be around the bend (no pun intended). Or marriage of sisters... at any age. Marry babies to men or women has to be considered as well.

I suppose the easy way out is to decide that morality has ceased to exist and allow, under any and all circumstances, for humans to marry in want way possible that they may choose.
Click to expand...

So wait?!?! You are saying is interracial marriage is immoral?
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
The evolution of marriage is interesting.

First it was man-woman. But many states prohibited interracial marriage. Now that is allowed. Then the issue was polygamous marriage, but that was disallowed. Now we may have a decision on same sex marriage. Then there is incestuous marriage which may be around the bend (no pun intended). Or marriage of sisters... at any age. Marry babies to men or women has to be considered as well.

I suppose the easy way out is to decide that morality has ceased to exist and allow, under any and all circumstances, for humans to marry in want way possible that they may choose.
Click to expand...

I am all in favor of someone marrying who they choose to but you probably do have to draw the line somewhere. You point out some extreme examples but what if it comes to that some day?

Then again who am I (or you) to judge? Only God can judge me (us) now!
 
KeepOnRollin said:
I am all in favor of someone marrying who they choose to but you probably do have to draw the line somewhere. You point out some extreme examples but what if it comes to that some day?

Then again who am I (or you) to judge? Only God can judge me (us) now!
Click to expand...

So where is the line drawn and who is it that gets to play judge & jury?
 
It's the old "slippery slope" thing.
If we allow gay marriage, soon we'll allow albino monkeys to marry siamese toddlers.
If we outlaw bazookas, soon we'll be taking away little kids' slingshots.
If we allow the government to require health insurance, soon jack-booted thugs will be jamming broccoli down all our throats.
If we stop recognizing that everything is completely binary, soon everybody is going to start taking into consideration all the grey areas of life and start adding a little nuance.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
So where is the line drawn and who is it that gets to play judge & jury?
Click to expand...

People vote for politicians and judges. Politicians write the laws and judges enforce them. It's how we run things around here in America. Haven't you noticed?
 
mook said:
People vote for politicians and judges. Politicians write the laws and judges enforce them. It's how we run things around here in America. Haven't you noticed?
Click to expand...

I was thinking more along the lines that society in general is the judge & jury. The more moraless we become as a society, it is reflected in ways like this.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
I was thinking more along the lines that society in general is the judge & jury. The more moraless we become as a society, it is reflected in ways like this.
Click to expand...

So you see gay marriages moving towards moraless society? I see it as a progressive move for society. Eye of beholder kind of thing . . .
 
Point of order. For fuck's sake it's immoral or amoral (take your pick depending on what you're trying to describe) but moraless?
 
EL PRESIDENTE said:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/b...ises-its-superiority-over-the-redneck-masses/


.Those who are against gay marriage, whether it is Catholic bishops or conservative politicians, are not seen simply as old-fashioned or wrong-headed, but as morally circumspect, possibly even evil. They are even branded as mentally disordered, being tagged as “homophobic” (that is, possessed of an irrational fear) if they so much as raise a peep of criticism of gay marriage. Here, ironically, gay campaigners rehabilitate the very same psychobabble that was once used to brand homosexuality as a disorder of the mind and wield it against anyone who now dares to say “I don’t like the gay lifestyle”.
Click to expand...




:MARIS61:
Click to expand...



:chestbump:
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
I was thinking more along the lines that society in general is the judge & jury. The more moraless we become as a society, it is reflected in ways like this.
Click to expand...

What evidence do you have that we're becoming a moral-less society? (Other than our evolving morality about marriage doesn't seem to agree with yours?)

Statistically, you're much less likely to be murdered, raped or stolen from in the past 20 years than pretty much any time in our nation's history. We've done away with slavery, and it's no longer socially acceptable to be openly racist (and to some extent sexist). We have a strong social safety net that prevents the elderly from living on the street. Children aren't allowed to work in slave-like conditions. Teen pregnancy is way down.

To me morality is the intellectual framework that helps prevent bad things from happening to a society. There are still lots of bad things happening now, but compared to, say, the 1950's or 1860's we aren't even in the same ballpark. I see that as pretty strong evidence of a thriving morality. It could be better, but it could always be better.
 
mook said:
What evidence do you have that we're becoming a moral-less society? (Other than our evolving morality about marriage doesn't seem to agree with yours?)

Statistically, you're much less likely to be murdered, raped or stolen from in the past 20 years than pretty much any time in our nation's history. We've done away with slavery, and it's no longer socially acceptable to be openly racist (and to some extent sexist). We have a strong social safety net that prevents the elderly from living on the street. Children aren't allowed to work in slave-like conditions. Teen pregnancy is way down.

To me morality is the intellectual framework that helps prevent bad things from happening to a society. There are still lots of bad things happening now, but compared to, say, the 1950's or 1860's we aren't even in the same ballpark. I see that as pretty strong evidence of a thriving morality. It could be better, but it could always be better.
Click to expand...

Really?

Porn

kiddie porn

infant murder

homosexuality

drugs

welfare state set to be abused to further expand it

expanse of socialism/communism in our society

fraudulent litigation

slypokerdog

... just to name a few

Seriously, anyone who thinks our society isn't on a downward spiral with respect to morality has genuinely serious problems...
 
Last edited:
BLAZER PROPHET said:
Really?

Porn

kiddie porn

infant murder

homosexuality

drugs

welfare state set to be abused to further expand it

expanse of socialism/communism in our society

fraudulent litigation

slypokerdog

... just to name a few

Seriously, anyone who thinks our society isn't on a downward spiral with respect to morality has genuinely serious problems...
Click to expand...

Well, I guess we know where you stand on this.

And the rest were always there. The internet/media just made them more public.
 
porkchopexpress said:
Well, I guess we know where you stand on this.

And the rest were always there. The internet/media just made them more public.
Click to expand...

I will disagree. I think they are more prevelant- media or no media.

I mean, it used to be people worked for a living because they had to. Now, virtually anyone can get a free government ride if they so choose and are remotely smart enough to figure it out. Lawsuites used to be based on the merits of the case. Now abut 90% are simple money grabs from insurance companies and the courts are loathe to interfere.... and so on and so on.

No, I think we're on a slippery slope downwards.
 
Blazer Prophet's marriage history is very truncated (and I won't even get into his 47% comments). For most of our species' existence formal marriage did not exist, although pair bonding did. Marriage through most if its history was a strictly economic institution, with the spread of agriculture survival took a group, bonded by law, and a means was required to pass along property - initially marriage only existed among propertied classes. Polygamy existed certainly in the bible and is still allowed in Islam. The idea of a couple marrying by choice for love with the idea that it would bring happiness, not merely survival, is quite new, no more than a few centuries in Europe, in parts of the world not even that. Even laws on what constitutes incest vary widely. Cousin marriages used to be common and are still legal in some but not all U.S. states. In some Middle Eastern countires, uncle/niece marriages were legal and considered a desired match, they are incest in the West. In England, adoptive siblings can legally marry, in the U.S. it's incest.

So this idea that gays are barging in on some eternal timeless unchanging relationship is laughable.

BTW, Kennedy & Alito, not suprisingly, showed a lot of ignorance of LBGT culture saying same sex marriage is new. Bullshit. Same sex couples have undergone ceremonies, despite lack of legal standing, since at least the 19th century. Somtimes they took vows to each other, sometimes had public ceremonies. By the 1970s sympathetic clergy peformed wedding ceremonies despite no license. I attended my first lesbian wedding in 1971 when I was 16. It's a lot older than cell phones!
 
For the record, I am not opposed to same sex marriages. I was hoping to avoid my direct personal view and have a more generic discussion as it seems to me to be more fruitful, but given the quality of the posts I felt it necessary to state my position clearly.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
For the record, I am not opposed to same sex marriages. I was hoping to avoid my direct personal view and have a more generic discussion as it seems to me to be more fruitful, but given the quality of the posts I felt it necessary to state my position clearly.
Click to expand...

You and ABM sound like an old married couple half the time on here.
 
crandc said:
BTW, Kennedy & Alito, not suprisingly, showed a lot of ignorance of LBGT culture saying same sex marriage is new. Bullshit. Same sex couples have undergone ceremonies, despite lack of legal standing, since at least the 19th century. Somtimes they took vows to each other, sometimes had public ceremonies. By the 1970s sympathetic clergy peformed wedding ceremonies despite no license. I attended my first lesbian wedding in 1971 when I was 16. It's a lot older than cell phones!
Click to expand...

State supreme court rulings that allow gay marriage, state recognized gay marriages, state performed gay marriages, family law related to marriage applied to same sex marriages. All newer than the cell phone or internet. That was their point.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
Really?

Porn

kiddie porn

infant murder

homosexuality

drugs

welfare state set to be abused to further expand it

expanse of socialism/communism in our society

fraudulent litigation

slypokerdog

... just to name a few

Seriously, anyone who thinks our society isn't on a downward spiral with respect to morality has genuinely serious problems...
Click to expand...

BP, I respect your opinion, but how could you honestly think that we're becoming less moral when a hundred years ago you could marry a 12 year old girl? How do you weigh illegal kiddie porn versus actually allowing someone to legally wed a 12 year old?

And you list homosexuality as a reason why we're on downward spiral to immorality, but there have been homosexuals for thousands of years. It's not a new concept. Alexander the Great had a homosexual relationship. It was immoral to persecute people for being different and force them to hide in shame and in fear.The fact that we, as a society, are finally allowing people to come out of the closet and be who they are openly, in my mind, means that we're becoming a more accepting, progressive society. That is indicative of better morals in my opinion. Judge not, lest we be judged.

Infant murder? Shit... the Spartans used to throw a child off a cliff if they had any deformities. People kill their kids. They have for a very long time. We only know about it now because the government has become much better at tracking children and people live significantly longer than they did.

Or drugs, how can you say that the usage of drugs are an indication of a downward spiral? If anything, our ridiculous attempt to control drugs has been a waste of energy and billions of dollars. Drugs and drug addiction has been around for thousands of years, and rather than spend money trying to prevent drugs or imprison users, we should be trying to help rehabilitate and ensure that there are viable options for people to safely use them. We are never going to eliminate drug use, it won't happen, and once again we are forcing people to hide their addiction and live in fear.

We need to stop trying to control people. It doesn't work, and they end up doing what they want regardless. Rather than control people, we should allow them to make decisions at 18 and help them live with those decisions. You want to know what the line is? As soon as someone reaches 18, they can marry whomever they want, they can do whatever drug they want, and if it fucks up their life so be it. The government needs to stop trying to control people. It needs to stop acting like it knows best, because it doesn't. If two consenting adults want to join together, let them. They're going to do it anyway, regardless of whether it's right in the eyes of a God or the government. If someone wants to do meth, they're going to do meth. All we can do is either help them recover from it or throw them in jail.
 
Natebishop3 said:
BP, I respect your opinion, but how could you honestly think that we're becoming less moral when a hundred years ago you could marry a 12 year old girl? How do you weigh illegal kiddie porn versus actually allowing someone to legally wed a 12 year old?
Click to expand...

Average life expectancy was about 45 in 1900.

The Atlantic has this article about "The Case for Getting Married Young," which is an interesting read.

http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/03/the-case-for-getting-married-young/274293/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top