1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Our Judicial Dictatorship

David in Houston Wrote: Oct 10, 2014 2:02 PM
Corbett_Wrote: "It is the homosexual's job to explain why the will of the people should be overturned." That has already been done dozens of times in Federal and Circuit courts. Those courts agreed that state arguments defending these bans were irrational, and did not benefit opposite-sex couples or their marriages. (Had you actually read any of the Circuit Courts rulings, you'd already know that.) The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with the Circuit Courts' rulings.
In response to:

Our Judicial Dictatorship

David in Houston Wrote: Oct 10, 2014 1:55 PM
So what? A half century ago, interracial marriage was still illegal in 17 states. For 150 years it was illegal in our country. -- As for "sodomy", consensual sex between two adults is none of the government's business. One-third of opposite-sex couples also partake of sodomy.
In response to:

Our Judicial Dictatorship

David in Houston Wrote: Oct 10, 2014 1:50 PM
Common sense, please. We are talking about two non-related consenting adults -- the EXACT same definition that is currently being used for opposite-sex marriages.
In response to:

Our Judicial Dictatorship

David in Houston Wrote: Oct 10, 2014 1:47 PM
Google: Loving v. Virginia, and get back to me. States cannot pass laws that are deemed unconstitutional. There has to be a rational basis (which benefits the state) in preventing gay citizens from being able to marry. Every Federal Court and Circuit Court has ruled that there is none. The Supreme Court agreed with their rulings.
In response to:

Our Judicial Dictatorship

David in Houston Wrote: Oct 10, 2014 1:42 PM
False. Non-religious couples have always been able to marry in our country. Secular civil marriage (which is NOT the same thing as "holy matrimony") is regulated by the government, not the church. The state issues the marriage license. A religious ceremony has no legal authority in our country. As for the "government's intrusion into religion", churches will never be forced to marry anyone they don't approve of. The First Amendment guarantees that.
Yeah, bans on interracial marriage weren't discriminatory either. Everyone could marry someone of the same race, so no one was being discriminated against. Right?
Really? No one knows what marriage is anymore? That's news to my nephew. I'm attending his wedding next month. He and his spouse seem to know what marriage is. I'm guessing it has something to do with love and commitment. Two things that gay couples are more than capable of fulfilling.
"...but I also don't believe in the idea that NOT having gay marriage is a horrible and unendurable denial of "equal rights" Let me take a wild guess... you happen to be straight, right? I'm wondering how you'd feel if society told you that you couldn't marry the adult of your choice because they had the wrong skin color, or had red-hair and freckles, or were left-handed. I'm willing to wager that you'd be wondering why it's anyone else's business that they were interfering in your personal choice of who to marry. In other words, the marriage of a same-sex couple LITERALLY has no impact on your life. Proof: My same-sex marriage hasn't seemed to harm you in any way. Perhaps I'm wrong? Would it benefit your life if I got a divorce? I'm thinking, doubtful.
"(for over two hundred years, this country has defined marriage in the way Jesus defined marriage; one-man-one-woman-for-one-lifetime)" For one lifetime? Laughable. Do I really need to tell you how many times Rush Limbaugh has gotten married? Two hundred years ago, only white couples could marry, and women were chattel in those marriages. Polygamy was also legal in our country until 1899. Interracial marriage has only existed for the past 50 years. So, NO, marriage has NOT been the same for the past 200 years. Marriage in 2014 looks nothing like it did in 1776. And if you asked most 5-year olds, they'd probably tell you that marriage is between two adults that love each other... because they probably already know gay couples that are married.
"Marriage is a social contract designed to create stable conditions for raising a family..." Procreation has never been a requirement to getting married. EVER. This argument has been thrown out of court dozens of times. The state does not care if non-procreative straight couples get married. If the state actually did anything to screen prospective couples from getting married you might have an argument. But they don't. Literally 100% of the straight populace has the right to get married. -- Even infertile couples, elderly couples, and those that don't want children.
1 - 10 Next