POLL: Constittional Amendment to outlaw Gay Marriages?

[LunarRay]

We should Amend the Constitution to make the amendment process require unanimous concurrence to amend.

 

[Kelemvor]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY


Just to ask a question here😉 I hear the words "civil liberties" and "rights" being tossed around alot during alot of political and social debates, so my question is:
Is marriage a "right" and if so why?
Now by "right" I mean when you are born with it.
Just a question I've been mulling over for a while but have never come up with a good answer.

CkG

What do you define as having a right to do? Do you have a right to walk out of your house in the morning? Do you have a right to go to school? Do you have a right to be employed (assuming you can find a job in this crap economy).

How is marriage any different. Why would one person have the right to get married and another person not? Everyone has the right to do anything until someone takes those rights away by making laws. Now most laws are for physical protection like you don't have the right to kill someone and such. But this is invading on someone's personal life and personal decisions that they can make on their own.

I had no problem with Bush up until he pulled this one out of his ass. Now he's getting further on the crap list as long as he keeps it up.

And let's thrown the pope in here too. He spoke out against it but what does he know? He's probably never met a gay person in his life. Is so damn old he probably wouldn't know it if he did. That decision was made by all the people under the pope who pull his strings and tell him what to do. Not surprising at all that the Catholic church is getting further up the list of religions that people are leaving.

But catholic priests must be up in arms. First they can't have sex with their alter boys and now they can't marry them either? Damn.

 

[her209]

1st amendment right.

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: tagej

Originally posted by: apoppin

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
It is simply MIND boggling that 25 PEOPLE have seen fit to vote Change the constitution.

I am simply going to attribute it to youth and inexperience or just plain ignorance of the issue at hand.

talk about using a nuke to kill a fly.

NO MATTER HOW MUCH you hate gays, no matter HOW MUCH you don't want gays to get married, USING THE CONSTITUTION IS JUST PLAIN STUPID.

I have yet to see any support for it at ALL except for idiots voting for it.

THERE IS NO GOOD REASON TO MAKE IT A CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE.

Bush thinks so.

😛

Perhaps he is right . . . we DO need a change - of leadership - to a president that is in touch with reality.

Actually, you don't seem to understand the issue at hand. The whole "change the constitution" issue came up as a result of the supreme court ruling on the Texas case. Basically, Bush (and many others) believe that even if they pass some sort of "protection of marriage" federal law to make it the law of the land (instead of each state having to do it's own thing), that the supreme court would strike down the law as unconstitutional. The ONLY way to make sure that a court cannot invalidate a law as 'unconstitutional' is to make it part of the constitution itself.

I'm not arguing one way or the other for/against allowing gay marriages, I'm pointing out why the whole changing of the constitution came into play.

Nonsense. The move to "change the constitution" to prohibit queer mariages has been on the extreme religious right's agenda for many years. The recent Supreme Court ruling for freedom just made it more urgent for them to do so. And these religious extremists are completely out of touch with reality - especially including their poster-boy President. 😛

 

[Double Trouble]

Nonsense. The move to "change the constitution" to prohibit queer mariages has been on the extreme religious right's agenda for many years. The recent Supreme Court ruling for freedom just made it more urgent for them to do so. And these religious extremists are completely out of touch with reality - especially including their poster-boy President.

Whether you agree or disagree with the premise that gays should be allowed to marry is not the point. What I'm saying is, the people who want to prevent gays from being able to marry are (probably) correct in thinking that a law will not be enough because the courts can throw out the law. Thus, if you believe gays should not be allowed to marry, then trying to amend the constitution is not "using a nuke to kill a fly" (as you posted in this thread), but rather a perfectly rational answer.

I personally am leery of seeing changes made to the constitution based on a political whim, but that's just me.

 

[jadinolf]

Originally posted by: dnetmhz
Let them do whatever the hell they want... just means more women for the rest of us 😉

Sounds good to me.😀

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: jadinolf

Originally posted by: dnetmhz
Let them do whatever the hell they want... just means more women for the rest of us 😉

Sounds good to me.😀

Not necessarily . . . it just means more married women . . . 😉 (to each other) 😛

:Q

And I am NOT the one that says that changing the constitution is like using a nuke to kill a fly . . . the religious right is correct - a constitutional ammendment is the ONLY way to slow the progress toward GLBT marriages - what they are not counting on is the backlash.