Defense of Marriage

prettygirlsmakegrave

Scholar
P
Joined
Mar 13, 2003
Messages
50
Wouldn't it be un-constitutional for there to be any sort of law preventing gay marriage? There are to arguments against it, neither one can really stand on its own and make a legitimate point though. First we have all sorts of religious texts. Now we can't put something into law because of what the bible says, that is no very secular now is it? Second we have a bunch of statistics. AIDS is more common amoung homosexuals. AIDS is also really common amoung other minority groups. AIDS all over Africa if anyone recalls that, its a global problem, it is a false assumption that AIDS is a gay issue, didn't we realize that about 15 years ago? So basically the only way that we will end up with some Defense of Marriage act is if it is backed up with statistics. Statistics lie.

Eventhough the push for gay marriage is like demanding acceptance into main stream society, I am finding it hard to find a legitamite reason against it.
 
I am curious about Dubya's announcements about wanting to "codify" marriage. Isn't marriage currently handled by the states? Wouldn't an attempt to legislate it at the federal level amount to an infringement on "state's rights"?
 
well, you know how little the Republicans support states rights over Federal Law. Bigger Federal government is better, isn't that what Bush ran on?
 
Eventhough the push for gay marriage is like demanding acceptance into main stream society
Click to expand...

Hmm, is that what homophobes call the 'gay agenda'?

What's wrong with acceptance, I totally support it. I do feel it is a rights issue. What if you were denied the chance to be married to your love because you have a physical disability. It's the same if you ask my HO. It's discrimination. It's not polygamy. It's not children being married to someone 4 times older than them.

It may even help lower the AIDS rates if there is less promiscuity. I would hope marriage is seen as sacred and people would have less partners.

As long as that happens, I'm thinking gay marriages could be a big plus.
 
Eos of the Eons said:
Hmm, is that what homophobes call the 'gay agenda'?

What's wrong with acceptance, I totally support it. I do feel it is a rights issue. What if you were denied the chance to be married to your love because you have a physical disability. It's the same if you ask my HO. It's discrimination. It's not polygamy. It's not children being married to someone 4 times older than them.

It may even help lower the AIDS rates if there is less promiscuity. I would hope marriage is seen as sacred and people would have less partners.

As long as that happens, I'm thinking gay marriages could be a big plus.
Click to expand...

We don't want to catch gay, or give it to our kids.
 
prettygirlsmakegrave said:
Wouldn't it be un-constitutional for there to be any sort of law preventing gay marriage?
Click to expand...

The constitution doesn't address marriage. I don't think marriage laws would fall under the Privacy like sodomy laws do.
 
American said:


We don't want to catch gay, or give it to our kids.
Click to expand...

I know I know. We rent the other half of our duplex to a gay couple. For some reason my son still likes girls (he's 12). I really don't understand why he is not all infested with 'gay'. I still prefer men, and my husband won't even hug another guy. Maybe it takes a few years to catch gay, or even just get bi.

:roll:
 
arcticpenguin said:
I am curious about Dubya's announcements about wanting to "codify" marriage. Isn't marriage currently handled by the states? Wouldn't an attempt to legislate it at the federal level amount to an infringement on "state's rights"?
Click to expand...
Clearly. No power given the Federal government by the Constitution includes the ability to define marriage. No real conservative would want the Federal Government getting involved in such matters.

Of course, I may not be as smart as the President, but I seem to remember that they passed the Defense of Marriage Act just a few years ago.
 
content free? I was kidding (if your referring to my last post). I'm also Canadian. :)

If you're not referring to my last post, then please ignore this post :D
 
With regard to your last post, I was not referring to your previous post but rather the post by another poster who I named at the end of my last post.

post post post.
 
Ah, me see. I don't pay enough attention to peoples' names who are making posts. I finally saw the name of the person who posted the post that I'm not sure is a joke or serious. I was assuming they didn't mean it. It's very american to be sarcastic.:D
 
Eos of the Eons said:
.... I'm not sure is a joke or serious. I was assuming they didn't mean it. It's very american to be sarcastic.
Click to expand...


We haven't met, have we?


I was serious. But since I'm not serious about anything, it doesn't matter. Men will do men, with or without my support. Why even argue about it....
 
:roll: Okay, I really thought you were not serious. You can't catch gay even if you get laid by one...LOL!! Like I said, we have gay tenants that we share a duplex with. Everyone in the neighborhood is still as they were before our tenants moved in.

Acceptance won't lead to more gay people. It would more likely cause less suicides and less depression among gays. I believe that would lead to less promiscuity, and slow or stop the spread of AIDS in that population. When you aren't depressed or crapped on, then you actually care about how you live and won't be as prone to risky behavior.

Why would anyone think being gay is 'infectious'??
 
Originally posted by American
I ain't gay, I already tried talking to gay guys and jesus they're a bunch of homo fags. Not a real man among any of them. losers.

Anyone have advice for me?
Click to expand...

Just to let you know where American is coming from, before you invest any more time in the convo.
 
bignickel said:


Just to let you know where American is coming from, before you invest any more time in the convo.
Click to expand...


You took my quote out of context, nickelhead.

Even by itself, presented the only way my enemies can challenge me, it's still a true statement.
 
The constitution doesn't address marriage. I don't think marriage laws would fall under the Privacy like sodomy laws do.
Click to expand...

But even then dosen't it have to comply with the constitution? I am not a government wiz at all, I acctually try to avoid how the government runs because it all seems kind of scrambled. Correct me if I am wrong but we can't have a non-secular law can we?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom