Marriage is NOT a Constitutional Right!

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by retirednature


Marriage began as a religious ceremony,


Bull. Marriage predates recorded history. To claim it has its origins in religion is flat out untrue.
Well...since you want to go "religiously"....Marriage begins the moment the 2 become 1 flesh. It never began at the "alter".




posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:27 PM
link   
when ever someone applies for a marriage license , they give up their right to marry for a privilege to marry. no where in the 14th amendment does it mention natural rights or natural born citizens. the only amendments that should even be relevent in this issue are the 1st , and the 10th , which both seem to be completely ignored by the federal government once again..



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by SamaraTen
 


The constitution isn't perfect.

Maybe you've noticed that several changes have been made already..... this would seem to me to be a pretty obvious question, but one which I think you might struggle with.

Seeing as how the constitution has already been altered for reasons many of us agree on, do you believe the constitution will change in the future?
Well...the BIGGEST problem i have, is not that gays want to marry, but that gays are trying to ride on the coat tails of the Civil Rights Movement. No one is violating their "civil rights". Gays haven't been hung or told to sit in the back of the bus because they're "gay".



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:33 PM
link   
reply to post by SamaraTen
 


Looking past your statement that you know what every gay person really wants, so what if all they want is the financial benefits? And who cares if marriage isn't all it's cracked up to be?

I gotta ask; assuming you're against the right for gay people to get married based on your posts, what is your motive behind it? Religious? What would change for the worse if gays are allowed to marry?



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by SamaraTen
 


Now I just think you're trolling.

en.wikipedia.org...

Posting this and exiting the thread. Goodbye.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:38 PM
link   
I feel as though whatever someone wants to do with their personal life is THEIR own business. As long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. For the government to tell me who I can and can not marry is ridiculous. They have enough control... we want them to control our happiness too?



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by SamaraTen
 


See how I predicted you would avoid the question.

Luckily time will snuff out all religion. Will be nice to have a good laugh over memories of a time long gone when such pitiful deluded people shared this earth with us.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SamaraTen
 


Maybe not.

But equality under the law IS a constitutional right.

Either both are granted the same rights, or neither is.

That's the point.
edit on 26-3-2013 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Simple solution to your being sick of hearing about it... demand the government remove the rights and privileges afforded to traditional marriage.
edit on 26-3-2013 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   
reply to post by SamaraTen
 


Marriage shouldn't be regulated by the government in the first place. It should be left up to private individuals and institutions. I believe that the government should recognize legal partnerships, regardless of whether we're discussing homosexuals or heterosexuals. In the end, it's your business and yours alone, it shouldn't be anybody else's business, so why don't you respect the rights of others?

And the argument that marriage is for "breeding" or "raising families", humans have been breeding and raising families since well before the concept of marriage came about. Heck, our ancient ancestors weren't even in committed relationships those many millenia ago. In reality polygamy, open relationships, have been the predominant norm for much of human history.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


I would disagree with your statement, simply on the grounds you choose to limit it to opposite sex partners. Marriage is not legally recognized (except for some Common Law marriages, which have certain rules I believe) without a certificate of consent from the state. Meaning, even if a minister marries you, without that certificate from the state, you do not enjoy any LEGAL benefits. Since the topic of the thread is using the Constitution to defend the idea of legal same sex marriage, religious beliefs, societal beliefs, and personal beliefs bear little relevance.
That being said, for the purpose of this thread, the state (i.e. government in general) is allowed to make it's own descisions (supposedly based on the will of the people) to define what marriage is. They accept unions without the need of a minister of any faith to perform a ceremony. They will even recognize an Elvis impersonator performing the ceremony. So from a legal standpoint, if the populace decides that same sex marriage should be recognized, legally speaking the Constitution does make the distinction that they should be afforded all the same benefits.
Anything else is another argument entirely.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by daryllyn
 



I believe in a little thing called 'minding my own damn business'. More people should try it.


He's right though... Marriage is not a Right....

Unless you want to use the government to force someone to marry a person who no one wants to marry.



A right, by technical definition, is something that you are capable of, by virtue of being born.

If you start mandating that Marriage is a right, technically you could sue the government to provide a spouse for you.

Also, technically speaking, the Federal Government has no jurisdiction over your relationships.

But then again, I'm just arguing semantics... lol
edit on 26-3-2013 by ErtaiNaGia because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 




The bottom line is using government force to make people accept their lifestyle thing is about that lot of people will never accept it.


This is not about the government forcing anybody to accept any lifestyle, this is an excuse concocted by certain opponents of this law to avoid having to make silly excuses about opposing gay marriage. This is about granting rights to all partnerships, regardless of their sexual orientation. How are two gay people getting married going to impact on your life Neo? You're smart enough to recognize that it won't have an impact, so it really shouldn't be a problem.

...and hey, if you don't accept homosexual relationships, nobody is forcing you to think otherwise.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Well... not specifically, but one could certainly argue that it is covered by the 9th amendment.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by neo96
 


Simple solution to your being sick of hearing about it... demand the government remove the rights and privileges afforded to traditional marriage.
edit on 26-3-2013 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)


That's fine by me so what way do people want to have it tho really?

First they say "stay out of their bedrooms" then get all mad when they do.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   
I love the way all the haters and people that think i have some kind of 'agenda' behind this thread, come out and start bashing. Give it up. We don't have to 'accept' it; like the gay community believes we should. Actually, i'm getting offended because it seems like if we don't "accept" the gay community, we're suddenly homophobic. I feel like MY CIVIL RIGHTS are being violated, more than those that are gay. Funny how the tides are turning. Accept it, or else! Is that the policy???

BTW...has anyone of you ever been through the civil rights movement? Or, are you all just a bunch of YOUNGSTERS kicking and screaming to have your way? Do you REALLY know what it's like to be DISCRIMINATED against??? Probably NOT!



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   
For your Edification and education I would have you look at the life of Bayard Rustin, Who was Openly gay right beside Martin Luther King, giving the REAL Direction behind MLK's mass meetings for civil rights. You stand corrected on that point.

And should I list the deaths of gay men and women solely because they were gay?
Matthew Shepard is the most well known young person to have been killed because he was gay.

Sorry you don't seem to care about what we see as Equality, regardless of constitutional mention or not.
We are Americans and deserve to have EQUAL RIGHTS.
That's what Americans do,, fight for their rights. The Only Agenda's I see are Religious ones.



Originally posted by SamaraTen

Originally posted by Wertdagf
reply to post by SamaraTen
 


The constitution isn't perfect.

Maybe you've noticed that several changes have been made already..... this would seem to me to be a pretty obvious question, but one which I think you might struggle with.

Seeing as how the constitution has already been altered for reasons many of us agree on, do you believe the constitution will change in the future?
Well...the BIGGEST problem i have, is not that gays want to marry, but that gays are trying to ride on the coat tails of the Civil Rights Movement. No one is violating their "civil rights". Gays haven't been hung or told to sit in the back of the bus because they're "gay".



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 



Well... not specifically, but one could certainly argue that it is covered by the 9th amendment.


Well, if you really want to get down to the nitty gritty of the argument...

What SPECIFICALLY is a Marriage?

I mean, legally?


IT's a contract between two people and the state to arbitrate property rights.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen23
 



We are Americans and deserve to have EQUAL RIGHTS.


Define "Right"



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by SamaraTen
 



Originally posted by SamaraTen
We don't have to 'accept' it;


Absolutely right. You don't have to accept it. Gays can have their rights to legal and lawful partnerships as heterosexual couples, and you don't have to accept it. Many people don't accept interracial marriages, but they happen nevertheless. Nobody is forcing you to to accept anything.


I feel like MY CIVIL RIGHTS are being violated,


Your rights are being violated because gays are being granted the right to marry? How does that work again? Is it your right to restrict the rights of others but yourself?





new topics
top topics
 
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join