Republicans Sign Brief in Support of Gay Marriage, what say u Too Hot Conservatives?

[HudsonGator]

Serious question, if Government has no right to define marriage as a man and a woman, by the same logic, shouldn't polygamy also be legal?

[108]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

When the constitution is silent on a particular matter, the issue is supposed to be left to the states and people.

that just isn't true

plenty of constitutional rulings have been held on marriage without it explicit stating it in the constitution

again, they can either take all marriage rights away or give them equally to gays

whether its through the Equal Protection Clause or the Due Process Clause, it will be struck down

The due process clause says that states may not deprive persons of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. And over the past century, the Supreme Court has spent a great deal of time itemizing the specific liberties protected by this guarantee. Among these, the Court has included a series of guarantees regarding marriage. Most importantly, in Loving v. Virginia (1967) the Court held that states could not ban interracial marriage since "the freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men." To "deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as racial classifications," Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote, was "directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment." In short, "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."44

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by gator996

I'm not throwing it around nonchalantly...

Used with all of the purpose the word intends.

Oh there's no question you are, I mean it's not even debatable

[Tim85]

Originally Posted by gator996

I'm not throwing it around nonchalantly...

Used with all of the purpose the word intends.

The issue is - just because you disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, it doesn't mean that you're a bigot towards them. It's flawed logic. It's like those people who call anti-gay marriage proponents homophobes, or having repressed homosexual tendencies or something. There are a lot of people who dislike, hate, or disagree with certain things - it in no means implies that they secretly like it or are a part of it.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by 108

that just isn't true

plenty of constitutional rulings have been held on marriage without it explicit stating it in the constitution

again, they can either take all marriage rights away or give them equally to gays

whether its through the Equal Protection Clause or the Due Process Clause, it will be struck down

There is nothing in the constitution that even speaks on marriage. There is just no case here for social grievances. Again this is something that goes to the states and the people.

[gator996]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Oh there's no question you are, I mean it's not even debatable

Go look up the definition of the word....perfectly describes who I was talking about....


Holding on to your beliefs...even in the face of all evidence to the contrary

[108]

Originally Posted by HudsonGator

Serious question, if Government has no right to define marriage as a man and a woman, by the same logic, shouldn't polygamy also be legal?

Logically it could be, but polygamy has nothing to do with ones natural inherent disposition that they have no control over

Sure we can not act out our sexual identity, but we didn't choose our sexual identity, and not acting on it, doesn't change it

Heterosexual polygamist individuals have the same marriage rights as other heterosexuals

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by gator996

Go look up the definition of the word....perfectly describes who I was talking about....


Holding on to your beliefs...even in the face of all evidence to the contrary

Um, believing that marriage should remain between one man and one women in and of it's self is not bigoted.

[108]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

There is nothing in the constitution that even speaks on marriage. There is just no case here for social grievances. Again this is something that goes to the states and the people.

you're just wrong, these is a body of cases that speaks otherwise

you might not agree with it, but its reality

[gator996]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Um, believing that marriage should remain between one man and one women in and of it's self is not bigoted.

No, but basically saying screw it I'm right even though everyone is conceeding is...

[HudsonGator]

I for one hope the SCOTUS leaves it alone, let politics decide the issue.

When an issue is decided by the will of voters it becomes legitimate and tends to settle the matter.

When the Court steps in and Constitutionalizes an issue the potential exists for decades of debate and politicalization of supreme court nominees (e.g. Roe v. Wade). Let the democratic process play out.

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by 108

you're just wrong, these is a body of cases that speaks otherwise

you might not agree with it, but its reality

No you're wrong. There is nothing in the constitution. Zero, zip nada

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by gator996

No, but basically saying screw it I'm right even though everyone is conceeding is...

OK so you are throwing around the word nonchalantly. It takes away any seriousness in a discussion you may want to have, because is say's if you don't agree with me then you're a "this" or a "that", insert any name calling you wish.

[gator10010]

Originally Posted by Dreamliner

Opposition to men-having-sex-with-other-men marriage has always smacked of 'government marriage for me, but not for thee." Come on, while men-having-sex-with-other-men marriage may not be Biblical, it is quintessentially American. The conservative cannot argue that it is not.

This is true as long as our government is in the marriage business. This debate for me always comes down to how one defines the term marriage. Those that view marriage in the religious sense tend to have a problem with gay marriage. Those that view marriage as a legal union recognized by our government tend to have less resistance towards gay marriage.

As long as we have the government slap in the middle of the marriage business then gay marriage should be allowed.

[gator996]

Originally Posted by Tim85

The issue is - just because you disagree with the homosexual lifestyle, it doesn't mean that you're a bigot towards them. It's flawed logic. It's like those people who call anti-gay marriage proponents homophobes, or having repressed homosexual tendencies or something. There are a lot of people who dislike, hate, or disagree with certain things - it in no means implies that they secretly like it or are a part of it.

The issue is that he holds his belief to be right even though the majority members of his political affiliation have conceeded...as have most Americans.


Has nothing to do with condoning the lifestyle...

[gator10010]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

Um, believing that marriage should remain between one man and one women in and of it's self is not bigoted.

You realize this is a difficult concept for those that support gay marriage right?

[108]

Originally Posted by gatorman_07732

No you're wrong. There is nothing in the constitution. Zero, zip nada

i didn't say there was, but there is a body of evidence that it has been used to rule on marriage cases

[gatorman_07732]

Originally Posted by gator10010

You realize this is a difficult concept for those that support gay marriage right?

No, what I do realized it's easy for some to throw name calling. This gets you nowhere in an argument and actually is not even supposed to be allowed in this forum.

[tegator80]

Originally Posted by gator996

Many believe the mockery & bankrupting of this country has been conducted by the political right....


And is Civil Rights legislation a place where liberals have gotten it wrong ...ALL OF THE TIME?


Would you prefer an America still with Jim Crow? Seperate...unequal...

Racially preferential in its laws and social structure?

You seem to be "busy" on this thread so I won't engage you too much. What don't you understand about the concept of "just waving your hand at problems instead of discernment?" If there are wrongs that need to be righted then do the work that is necessary to rectify it. Just passing laws because "if we can save just one life it will be worth it" is a foolish and insidious concept...proven time and again by history. And THAT marks the mantra of a true conservative.

[g8orbill]

I do not support homosexual marriages-just another reason to add to my list why I am no longer a member of the pub party

it is funny to me 996 that you support homosexual marriages as the black community is pretty high in numbers that do not support homosexual marriages