Public support solidly for gay marriage

We shouldnt be.

Some people just cant accept the idea that if someone is different from them, that they still must treated as equals under the law.

 

It's because religion, more often than not, supercedes logic among the general public.

If the story of Sodom and Gomorrah wasn't such a big focus of evangelicals, then there would be less prejudice toward gays in general.

 

I am still trying to figure out how anyone thinks there is public support for gay marriage when it just got crushed in virtually every election.... which is the real poll.

 

Well, we're going to disagree on that. Sometimes equality doesnt open up avenues you wish were there.

 

Why are libs pushing marriage between people with the homosexual birth defect when what the public really cares about is the economy?

Stop pushing your perverted view of marriage on the rest of society.

 

You can argue with the 14th amendment all you wish. I wont waste my time.

 

Well, no argument on that. Religion isn't my thing, and can be attributed with many of mans worst moments.

 

Why should I? The 14th doesnt offer anything to the Gay marriage crowd.

 

Why are righties pushing their bigotry birth defect? We shouldn’t be talking about equal rights for all. We should have them already.

Stop pushing your birth defects down my throat. I will stand with equality!

 

You do.

Neither of us can marry same gender.

 

"nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." <--- allowing group A to marry while not allowing group B to is unconstitutional. It is not equal protection under the law.

 

In 1950, white could marry and black and vice verse, it was the same for all right?

 

Youre twisting it around, but it wont work here.

For the second time Ill ask you to show me the two different rulesets you and I are given by the Constitution. You avoided it last time, and you will do so again.

Your group A and B argument is ficticious. noone is taking groups of people and putting them into seperate bins of rights. We all have the same. You in "group B" are there becuase you want to be in that group, noone put you there or singled you out. None of this changes what a Marriage is, and what it is not..or give life to some unequal treatment fairytale.

 

DOMA hasn't been technically found unconstitutional. That is only the opinion of the Obama administration and a few federal judges, who, by the way, are forced to continue to enforce the very act until it actually is found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court<---the opinion that actually matters.

My own opinion is for state's to decide the issue, not the feds, so while I would support the repeal of the act, I would not support it for the same reasons you would.

But feel free to get back to me when that happens.

 

Theres a couple wrongs with this line of thought. one being the obvious attempt to ride the coattails of racial discrimination for a sexual preference. Many things were restricted from blacks...the least they were going to worry about was that they couldnt marry a white person.

Shame on the Gay crowd for trying to equate the 2. You had an entire group of people being punished by verifiable birth traits. They had to use different facitlites...drink from different fountains...eat in different establishments...etc etc etc..

And somehow society doesnt wish to change Marriage to allow two guys...and you lump them together? Marriage with black/White was a side product of obvious, real discrimination. Gay Marriage is not. This isnt a case of anyone holding anything back, or taking away from gays..which is always the angle people try and present it as being. The real issue is that society doesnt want to change what a Marriage is to allow other sexual choices that dont fit.

Thats not discrimination, it simply isnt a Marriage.

 

There are 1400 rights that state and federal governments give out in marriage. Apply them equally or do not apply them at all.

Since DOMA is unconstituational, gender is a variable in marriage, just like race. Allow all groups of people to marry (that all parties involve can give legal consent) or none. No variables.

You simply have a creature of the mind that marraige HAS to be a man and a woman. Your creatures are not my problem.

PS: what group I am in or you are in is irrelevant. A Red Herring.

 

It is? Are you the supreme court?

So if you had your way, you'd allow for polygamy and incestual marriages simply because they are capable of giving legal consent. Hard to take you seriously at this point.

We all have our "creatures". Yours is an all in or all out policy because of some desire to remove all "variables". They aren't necessarily wrong, but some sure make more sense than others.

 

Google is your friend. There is ton of info on DOMA and the constitutionality of it.

More states allow 1st cousins to marry than gays to marry. Incestual marriages are allready allowed in over half the states. Way to stay current!

Heres some more info for ya. You do realize that blacks and white can now use the same drinking fountain rigth?

Heres another thing you should realize. We have a constitution in this country. Its was written way back in 1787. You should read it sometime. Maybe if you did, you would see these variables you want in are unconstitutinal.

 

This does not show me where the imbalance of constitutional rights, your claim, is or exists.

That creature is society, and their decision of what a Marriage is. Unfortunately dead end, sexual gratification lifestyles are not what society decided. That is everyones problem who wishes to get Married. Follow the criteria for a Marriage, and you can have one. pretty simple.

Then kindly stop throwing them around. it was your group A and B shenanigans that we were discussing. You threw it out there...

 

neither you nor anyone other than the Supreme Court is the arbiter of whether or not DOMA is constitutional. Without that, it's just a meaningless showcase of opinions we're trotting out. So either get the one that matters or stop treating the issue like it's already been proved.

What the hell does any of that have to do with the validity of yours or my opinion? Logic is your friend, buddy. Use it.

Strawman alert.

Please feel free to quote the part of the Constitution that proves your opinion that men should be able to marry men, sisters should be able to marry brothers, and that I can marry the entire adult population so long as they agree to it.

 

I have, you simply refuse to acknowledge it

Marriage according to your standards has been ruled unconstitutional.

It does not matter one iota what society deems and this or that. It is what the constitution deems and constitutional or unconstitutional.

I have to because you are fixated on the gay part of the marriage. By taking the gay part out and showing them as A and B, I&#8217;m trying to show you how its unconstitutional.

 

Ok, well just making sure you werent branding ME as the one relying on the red herrings. they were yours.

Also, the problem with this is that sure..if you use that red herring and divide everyone into seperate boxes...you can probably show anything you wish. This however is not the case.

In our society everyone is in the same container wiht regards to Marriage. They dont tell one person he can, and another he cannot. This can/can not argument is a made up scenario to show a ficticious imbalance.

All people are in the same container with regards to marriage rights. Everyone can if they want to. Some people dont like what the criteria is, and invent a "group A has" and "group B does not have" to try and make it appear to be discrimination. both groups have...just one doesnt want it. They want something else, and they want us to call it by the same name.

 

A federal court as ruled DOMA unconstitutional. The SCOTUS refuses to hear the appeal of the ruling on DOMA, thus validating the lower courts ruling.

Why do I have to explaion this? This should be a given,

If you cannot keep up with the coversation, why are you here?

The 14th amendment. Next

 

ok, so how come every state that has put on the ballot to ban gay marriage, has voted in favor of banning gay marriage?

 

The same reason why interracial marraige was denied for so many years: bigotry.