Non religious reasons to oppose gay marriage

[alzan]

Kind of a Catch 22.

And of course since we know for sure that marriages involving alcoholics are much less stable than non-alcoholic marriages, we must make it illegal for alcoholics to marry.

Dang! And just after LunarRay said my wife and I qualify for marriage.

 

[HumblePie]

Kind of a Catch 22.

And of course since we know for sure that marriages involving alcoholics are much less stable than non-alcoholic marriages, we must make it illegal for alcoholics to marry.

Not to mention those without grandparents, making minimum wage at a single job, unable to afford day care, drink or smoke too much, or have a mental disorder like OCD or Munchausen syndrome.

I can think of LOTS of non-optimal environments where kids are raised and the parents are allowed to legally raise them. Guess we should ban all those for not being perfect. No marriage license for them and no procreation license while we are at it right! I mean we might as well start calling ourselves China.

 

[her209]

Not to mention those without grandparents, making minimum wage at a single job, unable to afford day care, drink or smoke too much, or have a mental disorder like OCD or Munchausen syndrome.

I can think of LOTS of non-optimal environments where kids are raised and the parents are allowed to legally raise them. Guess we should ban all those for not being perfect. No marriage license for them and no procreation license while we are at it right! I mean we might as well start calling ourselves China.

What's the optimal family size?

 

[LunarRay]

I could offer to do the ministrations of the Celtic cross & a dozen Hail O'Leary's if it'll help. I've been a faithful Guinness abuser since before we were married. The wife is tall enough for Harp's but not stout enough for Guinness. Also we both like French ports, like Calais.

There is even a ferry from Rosslare to Calais.. [Rosslare, Cork] With the accent in Cork there is no reason to assume they are Anti-Gay.

I think I tasted Guinness once... but Murphy's is Cork's best! Harp's is ... what's it called... well... not sure but it ain't Murphy's... Pilsner?... I don't drink so can't be sure.

In any event, you seem to qualify... I'll speak to my God and you yours and well do lunch and decide on the merits of their God's notions on this marriage issue.😵

 

[HumblePie]

what's the optimal family size?

.999999...

 

[LunarRay]

What's the optimal family size?

Inches or millimeters?

 

[HumblePie]

Inches or millimeters?

I was thinking nautical miles.

 

[alzan]

There is even a ferry from Rosslare to Calais.. [Rosslare, Cork] With the accent in Cork there is no reason to assume they are Anti-Gay.

I think I tasted Guinness once... but Murphy's is Cork's best! Harp's is ... what's it called... well... not sure but it ain't Murphy's... Pilsner?... I don't drink so can't be sure.

In any event, you seem to qualify... I'll speak to my God and you yours and well do lunch and decide on the merits of their God's notions on this marriage issue.😵

Good deal! I'll make reservations for them at Milliways, the Restaurant at the End of the Universe, where they can watch the Gnab Gib after imbibing all manners of Guinness, Murphy's (with and without Corks) and Harp's Ale if they're so inclined, or reclined.

 

[LunarRay]

I was thinking nautical miles.

Wow... what an ego... I prefer millimeters... has a longer sound to it all.🙂

 

[Ninjahedge]

Have you never been to the turtle races?.... Without the turtles they'd have to change the name. Turtles are essential to the race... all the turtles are. We know the turtles have turtle minds but it allows us to ignore their mutterings and scream and yell as they meander here and there...

It's all a shell game.

 

[Ninjahedge]

There is more proof than that though, but since you seem to be spewing shit out your ass on this topic, I am not going to bother to take the time to lay it all out before you.

It isn't the crap coming out his ass that is the problem....

 

[nehalem256]

Since the SCOTUS holds that under the umbrella of Privacy are some of them Rights thingi... The Right to Marry is right there near The Right to abortion in the first trimester... among others.

Marriage rights have nothing to do with privacy. Demanding that the government/society recognize your relationship is the exact opposite of privacy.

[Too bad the ERA didn't get ratified.... it might have settled the issue right then and there... " Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."

Not allowing same-sex marriage does not deny or abridge any rights on account of sex. Both men and women, straight or gay, are free to marry someone of the opposite sex. Equality for all!

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Not allowing same-sex marriage does not deny or abridge any rights on account of sex. Both men and women, straight or gay, are free to marry someone of the opposite sex. Equality for all!

I guess you're okay with anti-miscegenation laws as well, then.

"Both men and women, black or white, are free to marry someone of the same race. Equality for all!"

 

[nehalem256]

I guess you're okay with anti-miscegenation laws as well, then.

"Both men and women, black or white, are free to marry someone of the same race. Equality for all!"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Nelson

The Court was not persuaded that an equal-protection violation was present either. Childless heterosexual marriages presented no more than a theoretical imperfection, which doesn't violate the Fourteenth Amendment. The couple's reliance on the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Loving v. Virginia (striking down an anti-miscegenation law) also failed: "in commonsense and in a constitutional sense, there is a clear distinction between a marital restriction based merely upon race and one based upon the fundamental difference in sex."

 

[HumblePie]

It isn't the crap coming out his ass that is the problem....

Mouth, ass.. I think he uses the same orifice at times for every duty.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

That's a legal argument -- and not too many decades before that, anti-miscegenation laws were considered perfectly legal, even upstanding.

Now try to address the ethical argument. It is inherently fallacious to say that a minority is not being discriminated against by virtue of being forced to behave as the majority does.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and the poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." -- Anatole France

To add to that: the title of this thread is "non religious reasons to oppose gay marriage".

Are you seriously going to try to argue that it is good for gays and lesbians to lie to themselves and to others to get into loveless marriages, and possibly have children as well? Do you really think we are better off with more dishonesty, misery, acrimony and broken homes? Don't heterosexuals do a good enough job on those counts already?

 

[soulcougher73]

Not allowing same-sex marriage does not deny or abridge any rights on account of sex. Both men and women, straight or gay, are free to marry someone of the opposite sex. Equality for all!

So you changed "account of sex" to "opposite sex" hoping it fit your ideology.

/head assplode

 

[LunarRay]

Marriage rights have nothing to do with privacy. Demanding that the government/society recognize your relationship is the exact opposite of privacy.



Not allowing same-sex marriage does not deny or abridge any rights on account of sex. Both men and women, straight or gay, are free to marry someone of the opposite sex. Equality for all!

Privacy is exactly the umbrella the SCOTUS use. The SCOTUS has legally [ and why I mentioned the ERA] recognized several fundamental rights not specifically listed in the Constitution and this is not an exhaustive list.

The right to privacy (which includes within it a set of rights) including:
The right to marriage
The right to make babies
The right to an abortion during the first trimester
The right to private education (homeschooling)
The right to contraception
The right of family relations (living together as a family)

The universally accepted inalienable rights are what Nations call Fundamental Rights... and Privacy is but one of them.

 

[LunarRay]

(... snip)


Not allowing same-sex marriage does not deny or abridge any rights on account of sex. Both men and women, straight or gay, are free to marry someone of the opposite sex. Equality for all!

That is a legal argument and one that is personal rather than an opinion of the court...

My point was and is: IF ERA had been ratified then all Rights and marriage is one of them, could not be denied because of the sex of the couple... boy/girl, boy/boy or girl/girl... It is a rational argument! It would no doubt be a 5/4 decision but possibly a 9/0 if the entire court saw the underlying basis for the ERA as eliminating Sex from any criteria of marriage as in jobs and earnings...

Edit: It is important to note that you, in the last bit of the penultimate sentence, include sex as the criteria... and that is excluded if ERA were law. The ERA sought to create equality were it did not exist...

 

[cybrsage]

Privacy is exactly the umbrella the SCOTUS use. The SCOTUS has legally [ and why I mentioned the ERA] recognized several fundamental rights not specifically listed in the Constitution and this is not an exhaustive list.

The right to privacy (which includes within it a set of rights) including:
The right to an abortion during the first trimester

The SCOTUS ruled the second is simply a subset of the first. You do not have a right to an abortion, you have a right to privacy and privacy allows you to kill an unborn human.

 

[LunarRay]

The SCOTUS ruled the second is simply a subset of the first. You do not have a right to an abortion, you have a right to privacy and privacy allows you to kill an unborn human.

Not sure your meaning of the first and second... but the point I understand.

Privacy is the key word... IT provides the means to do as you say... There may be 'Western' Nations that do not include abortion or when it is permitted as the US does.

I, legally, believe a fetus becomes a citizen - a human being - when it becomes viable... can survive without the mother... each case is different and requires an expert opinion for each...

I, personally, believe that upon conception a human has been created and abortion terminates that situation...

So, which 'bible' do I apply?... Well... the Constitution when it involves others and my belief in God when it concerns me.

 

[soulcougher73]

I, legally, believe a fetus becomes a citizen - a human being - when it becomes viable... can survive without the mother... each case is different and requires an expert opinion for each...

I, personally, believe that upon conception a human has been created and abortion terminates that situation...

So, which 'bible' do I apply?... Well... the Constitution when it involves others and my belief in God when it concerns me.

Very well put. Now if we could just get most other religious fundies to grasp that.

 

[alzan]

The SCOTUS ruled the second is simply a subset of the first. You do not have a right to an abortion, you have a right to privacy and privacy allows you to kill an unborn human.

1) Subset or not, it's still a right. Splitting semantical hairs doesn't make the right non-existent.

1a) I'm sure you mean the right to kill a an unborn potential human; since not every acorn planted becomes a mighty oak tree.

1b) Not everyone believes as you do. Welcome to the world.

 

[nehalem256]

Privacy is exactly the umbrella the SCOTUS use. The SCOTUS has legally [ and why I mentioned the ERA] recognized several fundamental rights not specifically listed in the Constitution and this is not an exhaustive list.

The right to privacy (which includes within it a set of rights) including:
The right to marriage
The right to make babies
The right to an abortion during the first trimester
The right to private education (homeschooling)
The right to contraception
The right of family relations (living together as a family)

The universally accepted inalienable rights are what Nations call Fundamental Rights... and Privacy is but one of them.

1.) Can you please explain how demanding public recognition of your relationship has anything to do with privacy?

2.) Explain why abortion ceases being a private act in the 2nd trimester?

 

[SMOGZINN]

1.) Can you please explain how demanding public recognition of your relationship has anything to do with privacy?

Then talking about privacy in this context what we really mean is lack of government scrutiny. So, it would be government scrutiny to look at the people involved in a marriage and decide, based on some criteria, if they are eligible. Their privacy is to be given a license with out having the government pry into their private lives.

2.) Explain why abortion ceases being a private act in the 2nd trimester?

That is harder to explain. I think the reasoning changes to something more like that the right to privacy is trumped by the right of the now recognized person to be protected. The key to that is that the fetus is not recognized as a person prior to that, and therefor does not have that protection.