NM high court won't decide gay marriage issue

Aug 17, 2013 Read more: Alamogordo Daily News 119

New Mexico's highest court isn't going to immediately decide whether gay marriage is legal in the state and instead will allow lower courts to first consider the issue.

Read more
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

“US Navy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#1 Aug 17, 2013
Since nobody can decide because of how it is addressed in the NM St Constitution, this is probably a question best left to the public, not politicians. Afterall, WE are NM, not THEM.

“US Navy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#2 Aug 17, 2013
To be clear, I'm speaking of the voting public here, as in on a ballot to be voted upon, not just public opinion.

I'm not for the ideal myself but will abide by whatever voters think if they/we get the opportunity to vote on it.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#3 Aug 17, 2013
Should your right to marry also be subject to the whims of the voters? I'm sure that there has to be something about you that makes you less than suitable marriage material in somebody's eyes. What other rights would you subject to the tyranny of the majority? Some of yours I hope, I'd hate to think you would only sacrifice the rights of others like that.

“26.2”

Since: Feb 08

Santa Fe, NM

#4 Aug 17, 2013
What about that provision of our Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal? Will that need to be modified to say that all straight men are created equal?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#5 Aug 18, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
To be clear, I'm speaking of the voting public here, as in on a ballot to be voted upon, not just public opinion.
I'm not for the ideal myself but will abide by whatever voters think if they/we get the opportunity to vote on it.
So, a majority of voters gets to decide which basic constitutional rights a minority voter can receive?

That doesn't sound very fair.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#6 Aug 18, 2013
Lobo Viejo wrote:
What about that provision of our Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal? Will that need to be modified to say that all straight men are created equal?
I guess so, if we can vote away basic rights from any group we don't like, for no reason other than "I don't like you".

“US Navy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#7 Aug 18, 2013
Lobo Viejo wrote:
What about that provision of our Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal? Will that need to be modified to say that all straight men are created equal?
All men are "created" equal. Your interpretation is carrying it beyond that.

Am I led to believe you don't think society plays a role in this issue? Who then should decide the issue, a seriously flawed legal system? Why not the people, society? Doesn't a public vote manifest the overall will of the Constitution?

“US Navy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#8 Aug 18, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
So, a majority of voters gets to decide which basic constitutional rights a minority voter can receive?
That doesn't sound very fair.
Yep, democracy in action isn't fair<sigh>... And if it passed that wouldn't be fair either - right?

“US Navy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#9 Aug 18, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
I guess so, if we can vote away basic rights from any group we don't like, for no reason other than "I don't like you".
You see it as a basic right, others in society do not. And you intentional misdirection doesn't bolster your argument one iota.

“US Navy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#10 Aug 18, 2013
Ok, so if the court system cannot or will not decide the issue, just how would YOU suggest it be settled?

“I ain't afraid of no ghosts.”

Since: Aug 08

Dear old mucky Drasnia

#11 Aug 18, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
Ok, so if the court system cannot or will not decide the issue, just how would YOU suggest it be settled?
I'd offer the anti-equality crowd a choice. Either make same-sex marriage legal, or strip away ALL civil benefits from religious marriage effective immediately.

“26.2”

Since: Feb 08

Santa Fe, NM

#12 Aug 18, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
All men are "created" equal. Your interpretation is carrying it beyond that.
Am I led to believe you don't think society plays a role in this issue? Who then should decide the issue, a seriously flawed legal system? Why not the people, society? Doesn't a public vote manifest the overall will of the Constitution?
I am all for putting issues out to vote. My point is that, if you want to pass a law that would legalize discrimination against a group of Americans, you first need to repeal the Declaration of Independence.

“US Navy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#13 Aug 18, 2013
Silk_the_Absent1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'd offer the anti-equality crowd a choice. Either make same-sex marriage legal, or strip away ALL civil benefits from religious marriage effective immediately.
Its not anti equality, you are simply trying to change the pattern of things that have always been accepted by the majority of societies to suit your liberal agenda. You see it as your right, I do not.

Since society is made up of people, should not they be the ones to decide the issue, just like they do on pretty much everything else, at least until politicians poke their noses in?

“Each Thought Creates A Reality”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#14 Aug 18, 2013
A Republic versus a Democracy? Open to the whims of the majority. That has always worked. If you aren't a member of the majority then you are out of luck. Get in step with the majority. The price of a Republic is that those you don't like may still retain their rights and equal protection under the law. What a concept.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#15 Aug 18, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
Its not anti equality, you are simply trying to change the pattern of things that have always been accepted by the majority of societies to suit your liberal agenda. You see it as your right, I do not.
...
The pattern of things changes ONLY for us, not for you.

If society decided that your right to marry was inappropriate, and arbitrarily decided that you would NEVER be able to marry your spouse, would you fight that? Would your love your spouse enough, and your kids enough, to demand the same basic right to marry that all other adults in society have?

If not, then your marriage is worthless.

And why do you feel that you should have the right to decide which consenting single adult I can marry? Would you sit still and take it if I have the ability to decide for YOU?

Marriage is NOT a "liberal agenda". Marriage is a basic human and civil right that cannot be taken from me or anyone else on a whim. There needs to be a rational state interest to do that, and, in this case, there is no such thing.

The state's interest is in helping families to be more stable, chidlren to be more protected, and the elderly to be more secure, and marriage helps with ALL of these things - for gay and straight people alike.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#16 Aug 18, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
Ok, so if the court system cannot or will not decide the issue, just how would YOU suggest it be settled?
Sadly, it shouldn't need to be "settled", since marriage is already a civil right. However, since some people seem to be hell-bent on harming other people's families, the courts will indeed have to decide. And, in this case, it will start with the lower courts and work it's way up.

Costing tax-payer dollars and stress for the families concerned.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#17 Aug 18, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
You see it as a basic right, others in society do not. And you intentional misdirection doesn't bolster your argument one iota.
Why, then, has the court deemed marriage a basic civil right in case after case? Even murderers on death row can legally marry. We are going by law, here, and the courts have already deemed marriage a civil right.

If you want to strip that right away from a segment of society, then there needs to be a valid interest in doing so.

Can you come up with even one rational reason for denying a same sex couples the ability to legally marry? Will it harm them? Their Children? Society? Is "I think they're icky" enough of a reason to deny a basic civil right to a group?

Prove it.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#18 Aug 18, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep, democracy in action isn't fair<sigh>... And if it passed that wouldn't be fair either - right?
We don't live in a Democracy.

And, if a law is created specifically to harm a segment of society based only on animus and with no rational state interest, then it must fail, under our Constitution.

Fortunately, that's why we have the courts, and justice usually comes, albeit slowly at times.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#19 Aug 18, 2013
CornDogz wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Since society is made up of people, should not they be the ones to decide the issue, just like they do on pretty much everything else, at least until politicians poke their noses in?
So, if the majority in the south wanted slavery, they should have kept it? If the majority in a state want segregation, or to ban interracial marriages, they should have it? If a majority believe that all religious denominations should pay taxes, they must pay?

You believe in majority rule on all issues? I suspect that means you feel comfortable that you are comfortably in the majority. That makes you a bit of a hypocrite.

Fortunately, our government is set up to protect the rights of minorities as well as the majority. That's why we have the courts. To protect the rights of ALL - not just the majority.

“US Navy”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#20 Aug 18, 2013
Lobo Viejo wrote:
<quoted text>
I am all for putting issues out to vote. My point is that, if you want to pass a law that would legalize discrimination against a group of Americans, you first need to repeal the Declaration of Independence.
Perhaps a definition of discrimination with respect to the DoI would be a better starting point. Yours, mine and others interpretations are certainly different and that seems to be the crux of many peoples argument for/against it. I don't see it as something the legal system can/should be deciding, I think it should be decided by the people voting and the outcome is what it is, regardless of our opinions.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

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.

New Mexico Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Martinez prefers to stick to issues (Jun '10) 16 hr justice is just a... 6,330
News Say it in six words (Jul '08) Sat Kid_Tomorrow 8,672
Mystery of Olyphant,Pa (Apr '13) Apr 17 olyphant 2
News Dorian Dodson retires from CYFD (Jun '10) Apr 15 lance shriver 8
News New Mexico VA clinic among nationa s worst for ... Apr 9 ohhhbs 1
News Ted Barela, Liz Stefanics nominated for Griego ... Apr 3 So most 1
New monument to commerate Battle of Glorieta Pass Mar 30 Kenneth Hawkins 1
More from around the web