Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 59810 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Mar 28, 2013, titled Gay marriage. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering two controversial cases involving whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry: Proposition 8, California's 2008 ban on gay marriage, and the Defense of Marriage Act, which since 1996 has defined marriage for federal purposes as a union between a man and a woman.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#3106 May 7, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
More than 31 states have laws defining marriage as male/female; that's good enough for me.
Don't change the definition of marriage to satisfy sexual predilection; have some respect.
None of which you can rationally defend.

Changing the definition is irrelevant. Equal protection of the law is the issue. It seems you aren't smart enough to articulate any legitimate sate interest served by denying such equal protection.
common sense

Melbourne, Australia

#3107 May 7, 2013
Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no rational basis for limiting civil marriage solely because of the sex of the partners. All arguments against same-sex couples in civil marriage are irrational or illogical, or based on ignorance, animus, fear, or religious superstition or myth.
You certainly haven't come up with a good one.
Even assuming that it could be done (which it hasn't), there is no rational basis for creating a "separate but equal" institution for establishing kinship between unrelated adults when a perfectly suitable on already exists: civil marriage.
How about the reason that the majority of the population want to keep marriage as a purely heterosexual institution.But i guess that doesnt matter to you as you have no respect for other traditions ,religious beliefs or culture and are just wanting to change marriage for your own selfish purposes ,regardless of what the majority of the population want.Its just another typical example of a small minority controlling the majority through political correctness.
Just Let It Go

Tempe, AZ

#3108 May 8, 2013
common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
How about the reason that the majority of the population want to keep marriage as a purely heterosexual institution.But i guess that doesnt matter to you as you have no respect for other traditions ,religious beliefs or culture and are just wanting to change marriage for your own selfish purposes ,regardless of what the majority of the population want.Its just another typical example of a small minority controlling the majority through political correctness.
So sorry NO common sense but all the latest national polls show that the majority are now in fact for marriage equality! Care to try again? Oh by the way,the state of Delaware has been added to the states that now have marriage equality and that now makes 11! More to follow shortly!
d pantz

United States

#3109 May 8, 2013
common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
How about the reason that the majority of the population want to keep marriage as a purely heterosexual institution.But i guess that doesnt matter to you as you have no respect for other traditions ,religious beliefs or culture and are just wanting to change marriage for your own selfish purposes ,regardless of what the majority of the population want.Its just another typical example of a small minority controlling the majority through political correctness.
prove it! Are you sure that's their reason? Its not mine, I respect beliefs of others and I think people should do whatever they want, only the federal government should not be involved.
d pantz

United States

#3110 May 8, 2013
Just Let It Go wrote:
<quoted text>
So sorry NO common sense but all the latest national polls show that the majority are now in fact for marriage equality! Care to try again? Oh by the way,the state of Delaware has been added to the states that now have marriage equality and that now makes 11! More to follow shortly!
right, but probably not in the sense your thinking. http://singletude.blogspot.com/2008/03/single...
I dont see how you guys think its unfair for one group to get benefits over another, yet your solution is to allow or not allow certain people into that group, and further alienate another.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3111 May 8, 2013
common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
How about the reason that the majority of the population want to keep marriage as a purely heterosexual institution.But i guess that doesnt matter to you as you have no respect for other traditions ,religious beliefs or culture and are just wanting to change marriage for your own selfish purposes ,regardless of what the majority of the population want.Its just another typical example of a small minority controlling the majority through political correctness.
oops...the majority of our population now supports SSM....

we don't make laws in this country on religious cult beliefs. they belong in the tax subsidized churches they have here.
common sense

Glen Waverley, Australia

#3112 May 8, 2013
Just Let It Go wrote:
<quoted text>
So sorry NO common sense but all the latest national polls show that the majority are now in fact for marriage equality! Care to try again? Oh by the way,the state of Delaware has been added to the states that now have marriage equality and that now makes 11! More to follow shortly!
Polls are a load of crap,they can easily be swayed in the way the poller wants.I guarantee you that if you asked everyone in the states whether they want to change the meaning of marriage to include homosexuals ,the vast majority would say no.Its just this big push by the mainstream media trying to brainwash people to accept it.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3113 May 8, 2013
common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
Polls are a load of crap,they can easily be swayed in the way the poller wants.I guarantee you that if you asked everyone in the states whether they want to change the meaning of marriage to include homosexuals ,the vast majority would say no.Its just this big push by the mainstream media trying to brainwash people to accept it.
no, that is exactly what they asked them.

sorry, your bigotry loses.
holder

Mount Hope, WV

#3114 May 8, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>oops...the majority of our population now supports SSM....
we don't make laws in this country on religious cult beliefs. they belong in the tax subsidized churches they have here.
Give us figures, stats, We do not believe you. The majority do NOT support same sex marriage. Again, you lie.
Just Let It Go

Beacon, NY

#3115 May 8, 2013
common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
Polls are a load of crap,they can easily be swayed in the way the poller wants.I guarantee you that if you asked everyone in the states whether they want to change the meaning of marriage to include homosexuals ,the vast majority would say no.Its just this big push by the mainstream media trying to brainwash people to accept it.
Well golly gee! I know lets ask the good voters in the states of Washington,Maryland and Maine who just all voted for marriage equality in the last election! Kinda shoots a hole in that bigoted mind of yours now doesn't it? LOL

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3116 May 8, 2013
Just Let It Go wrote:
<quoted text>
Well golly gee! I know lets ask the good voters in the states of Washington,Maryland and Maine who just all voted for marriage equality in the last election! Kinda shoots a hole in that bigoted mind of yours now doesn't it? LOL
hey! don't forget us in MN...we were the first to vote down a constitutional amendment banning SSM.

baby steps, Bob. baby steps...
Just Let It Go

Beacon, NY

#3117 May 8, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>hey! don't forget us in MN...we were the first to vote down a constitutional amendment banning SSM.
baby steps, Bob. baby steps...
Hey buddy,lets not forget Delaware and that makes 11 states plus D.C.! And most likely California the most populous state come this June! Not to mention DOMA which is heading down that road to the great crap heap f history right where it belongs when the Supreme court rules!
Just Let It Go

Beacon, NY

#3118 May 8, 2013
holder wrote:
<quoted text>
Give us figures, stats, We do not believe you. The majority do NOT support same sex marriage. Again, you lie.
Now who is the liar? Your wish is my command!

latest national polls on same sex marriage!

www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57576249/poll-53...

And.....

www.gallop.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majorit...

There are many other ones that can be found if you simply google them!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3119 May 8, 2013
Just Let It Go wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey buddy,lets not forget Delaware and that makes 11 states plus D.C.! And most likely California the most populous state come this June! Not to mention DOMA which is heading down that road to the great crap heap f history right where it belongs when the Supreme court rules!
dude...everyone forgets Delaware.

:)
lol

Mount Hope, WV

#3120 May 8, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>dude...everyone forgets Delaware.
:)
except you.

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#3122 May 8, 2013
Just Let It Go wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey buddy,lets not forget Delaware and that makes 11 states plus D.C.! And most likely California the most populous state come this June! Not to mention DOMA which is heading down that road to the great crap heap f history right where it belongs when the Supreme court rules!
and to think of all that tax payer money Bohner threw at. Wow.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#3123 May 8, 2013
common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
Polls are a load of crap,they can easily be swayed in the way the poller wants.I guarantee you that if you asked everyone in the states whether they want to change the meaning of marriage to include homosexuals ,the vast majority would say no.Its just this big push by the mainstream media trying to brainwash people to accept it.
Not necessarily true. But the reason it would still be unfair is because the great majority of liberals are concentrated in the urban areas of the country, primarily in the Northeast.

First, the issue of States rights must be respected. Second, industrialized centers are not what they used to be anyway. The places of industrial growth are not in overpopulated urban centers anymore. The times have changed. We are not dependent on static rail and waterways for the distribution of products.

There's a dangerous rationalization going on in most of the modern world that assumes that resources will always be available to consume. With that in mind, the aristocrats of both parties accept the homosexual agenda because they seek the power of perpetual industrial growth.

I can think of several reasons why the logic is self-destructive. In reality, the biggest changes happen due to relative relationships. Why did the Soviet Union collapse? Certainly not due to a shortage of resources, but in their case, a collapse of capital and political support as a result of the war industry. What might cause China to collapse? Certainly, the instability of their crowded seaboard would play a factor, as might overwhelming pollution that will result from their own blind ambition.

The important link is that homosexuality seems to be linked to overcrowding. Scientists have observed as much in the animal kingdom. It seems to be an alpha male response, a nuclear option for dominating an overly large herd. Well, like most nuclear options, the retaliation seems to also build nukes and to use them. Nobody wins.

For my part, I can only try to separate the rational from the irrational. To that end, I typically try to take the obsessive-compulsive and reenforce that behavior. What is coming is likely to be a global conflict that one should plan to survive, not win. Too bad for those who can't control their impulses!

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#3124 May 8, 2013
Just Let It Go wrote:
So sorry NO common sense but all the latest national polls show that the majority are now in fact for marriage equality! Care to try again? Oh by the way,the state of Delaware has been added to the states that now have marriage equality and that now makes 11! More to follow shortly!
Since when has fact or reality mattered to a zealot?

Ultimately, the will of the majority is irrelevant, since marriage has consistently been held to be a fundamental right by the US Supreme Court, which has also held that fundamental rights may not be put to a vote.

Those like "common sense" have no valid, or even rational, argument against equality under the law, which is constitutionally mandated in the US.

Perhaps they are peeved that their own country already allows such equal protection, even if under a different name? Perhaps they feel that such freedom is too great a temptation? Perhaps they are simply a mindless bigot? Ultimately, it really doesn't matter, they have no valid argument.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#3125 May 8, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily true. But the reason it would still be unfair is because the great majority of liberals are concentrated in the urban areas of the country, primarily in the Northeast.
First, the issue of States rights must be respected. Second, industrialized centers are not what they used to be anyway. The places of industrial growth are not in overpopulated urban centers anymore. The times have changed. We are not dependent on static rail and waterways for the distribution of products.
There's a dangerous rationalization going on in most of the modern world that assumes that resources will always be available to consume. With that in mind, the aristocrats of both parties accept the homosexual agenda because they seek the power of perpetual industrial growth.
I can think of several reasons why the logic is self-destructive. In reality, the biggest changes happen due to relative relationships. Why did the Soviet Union collapse? Certainly not due to a shortage of resources, but in their case, a collapse of capital and political support as a result of the war industry. What might cause China to collapse? Certainly, the instability of their crowded seaboard would play a factor, as might overwhelming pollution that will result from their own blind ambition.
The important link is that homosexuality seems to be linked to overcrowding. Scientists have observed as much in the animal kingdom. It seems to be an alpha male response, a nuclear option for dominating an overly large herd. Well, like most nuclear options, the retaliation seems to also build nukes and to use them. Nobody wins.
For my part, I can only try to separate the rational from the irrational. To that end, I typically try to take the obsessive-compulsive and reenforce that behavior. What is coming is likely to be a global conflict that one should plan to survive, not win. Too bad for those who can't control their impulses!
It's funny when you present a pseudo-intellectual argument in an attempt to bolster your position.

Does the Constitution mandate that states provide equal protection of the law for all persons within their jurisdiction?

Can you indicate any legitimate state interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry, which would render such a restriction constitutional?

I very much doubt it.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#3126 May 8, 2013
common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
How about the reason that the majority of the population want to keep marriage as a purely heterosexual institution.
Aside from the fact that the numbers on this issue have changed in the past two years, we don't live in a democracy, and we don't put the fundamental rights of citizens up to the vote of majorities.

We live in a constitutional republic with guarantees of equal protections of the law -- for ALL PERSONS.
common sense wrote:
But i guess that doesnt matter to you as you have no respect for other traditions ,religious beliefs or culture and are just wanting to change marriage for your own selfish purposes ,regardless of what the majority of the population want.Its just another typical example of a small minority controlling the majority through political correctness.
Other citizens are and will be still free to marry as they wish -- opposite-sex marriage, or religious marriage.

Recognizing same-sex couples in civil marriage won't change that.

What YOU don't want is to end the privilege that opposite-sex couples currently enjoy for no rational reason. That's your issue -- you refuse to give up a privilege. THAT'S the true selfishness.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Mormon church backs Utah LGBT anti-discriminati... 28 min Dana Robertson 3,831
News Ireland same-sex marriage 37 min American_Infidel 362
News Republic of Ireland votes for equal marriage 51 min flame of truth 157
News 60 Percent: Record Number Of Americans Support ... 3 hr Brian_G 349
News Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? (Sep '14) 3 hr Frankie Rizzo 5,748
News The right therapy for LGBT youth 3 hr HumanSpirit 285
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 3 hr Brian_G 51,761
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 5 hr NoahLovesU 21,822
Are the mods fair and balanced? 15 hr Friend of Poof1 842
More from around the web