Main > Everything Else
election irony
TA Pilot:
To say that a gay marriage cheapens a heterosexual's marriage...
But thats not the argument I'm making.
"I think, TA, that all of this stuff: States rights, the institution of marriage losing it's "meaning" all stems from your seeming inability to separate marriage as an institution of the state from marriage as a religious institution.
Thats a very interesting position, given that I haven't mentioned marriage as a religious institution.
If you want to be married 'before God' thats wonderful - do so. Man+man, woman+woman, 6 men+4 women+goat - if you thinkl God is OK with that, then gettt married before Him.
But unless that marriage also follows the laws of the state, then its not valid.
"The full faith and credit clause is in the constitution for the express purpose of making a Michigan Supreme Court ruling supercede Ohio's constitution."
Abso-LUTE-ly false.
The FF+CC has everyting to do with states having to recognize contracts, licenses, etc issued by one state. This stems from a weakness of the Articles of Confederation that had no such provision. States would refuse to recognize all kinds of things. This was seen as a problem, and the FF+CC was added.
NOTHING in the FF+CC was EVER intended to let a court in one state to force another state to recognize something illegal in th at state. There NO way you can do that.
Look at it like this:
The OHSC says its legal to mount a machinegun to my truck and drive around the state. Your're arguing that CA, where machineguns are illegal, is forced to recognize the OHSC ruling and allow me to do something in CA that the people of CA cannot do.
Doesnt work that way.
" If I go to Ohio they are required by federal law to recognize my marriage"
Actually, they are required by the FF+CC. Federal law says that if yours is a same-sex marriage, Ohio does NOT have to recognize it.
"The reason that conservatives need an amendment to the U.S. constitution is that all of these state laws and amendments being passed clearly violate the U.S. Constitution"
No. They dont. There's nothing in the Constitution that protects marriage, gay or otherwise. OH can define marriage however it sees fit -- in fact, OH can even dissolve the institution completely, and there's nothing the Fed Gcmnt can do about it.
"As long as you consider marriage an institution of the state you can't get around full faith and credit."
And here, you make my case. The amendment is to protect the right of the state to define marriage as is chooses, without having to be bound by the laws of another state - especially law created by the bench
allroy1975:
--- Quote from: saint on November 09, 2004, 04:34:53 pm ---With all due respect, that is the silliest argument against gay marriage I've ever heard, and it seems to be the biggest one.
.......
--- saint - married, happy, unaffected by any choices you make that don't directly involve me.
--- Quote from: TA Pilot on November 09, 2004, 03:23:44 pm ---Once you allow gay/multiple marriages, you completely undermine the long-held sanctity of same.
--- End quote ---
--- End quote ---
I didn't want to use all that space just to quote the message....
I just wanted to let you know, Saint, I'm even happier now that I bought your book and hopefully helped support you a little bit. I wear my BYOAC hat everywhere I go and every time I tell someone about my mame cabs, I tell them to visit your site.
It makes me happy to see that the leader of the board is open minded. Makes me feel like I have less chance of getting banned. hehehe....
I'm just glad to see someone else who doesn't feel the need to control others just ...well, i don't know why but...That post made me happy.
Allroy
shmokes:
--- Quote from: TA Pilot on November 09, 2004, 06:21:28 pm ---" If I go to Ohio they are required by federal law to recognize my marriage"
Actually, they are required by the FF+CC.
--- End quote ---
Well...yeah. I thought I made it clear that I was talking about the FF+CC
And you misunderstand me. I'm not saying that the FF+CC gives the Michigan Supreme Court carte blanche to dictate whatever it wants in another state. I'm saying that marriage contracts fall under FF+CC. So, if someone gets married legally in one state, other states (short of a U.S. Constitutional amendment) have to recognize the marriage. That's why I gave the example about blood tests.
It's why businesses incorporate in Delaware. It's why people cross the border to elope if they live in a state (like Ohio) that requires a waiting period. It's why my marriage is recognized by states that require blood testing even though it would be illegal had I got married in the same way in that state.
So, no, FF+CC does not allow you to drive around with a mounted machine gun. It does, however, apply to contract recognition, including marriage. Including gay marriage. Short of a constitutional amendment.
DrewKaree:
--- Quote from: shmokes on November 09, 2004, 02:53:04 pm ---It's like arguing
Hardly. It's more like talking to a wall.
with the Bush haters.
That's not even a complete sentence. How am I supposed to respond to that.
That's some election iron
An election iron? Is that supposed to get the wrinkles out of an election?
y
I don't speak spanish.
--- End quote ---
THAT is all kinds of funny! :D
saint:
--- Quote from: TA Pilot on November 09, 2004, 06:21:28 pm ---To say that a gay marriage cheapens a heterosexual's marriage...
But thats not the argument I'm making.
--- End quote ---
Fair enough. I've revised my post below:
--- Quote from: TA Pilot on November 09, 2004, 03:23:44 pm ---Once you allow gay/multiple marriages, you completely undermine the long-held sanctity of same.
--- End quote ---
With all due respect, that is the silliest argument against gay marriage I've ever heard, and it seems to be the biggest one.
Marriage is a bond between two people who form a family unit. My relationship with my wife is no more affected by two same sex people forming a bond than it is by the staggering number of heterosexual couple who are getting divorced. My love for my wife is not affected by two other people loving or hating one another. Anyone whose relationship could be altered because of the relationship of two other people should be seriously questioning the strength and validity of their own relationship, not looking askew at someone else's.
To say that a gay marriage undermines the long-held sanctity of marriage implies some alteration of conventional marriages -- some sort of scarcity of available marriage partners or some kind of strange competition. I don't understand that thinking at all. There's not a limited number of marriages allowed per year. A gay marriage doesn't suddenly make fewer partners available for heterosexual people (they were never available in the first place, married or not).
Does the marriage of two gay people suddenly make my marriage to my wife less valued in the eyes of the church or God? If so, why? My committment and love for my wife hasn't changed, why should its value in the eyes of the church or God? Gay people getting married doesn't make me go to church less, pray less, have less faith. If your belief and faith can be changed by the actions of someone else, it's your faith that has an issue, not the actions of the other person.
Does a marriage of two gay people suddenly change the value of my marriage to the state? Does the amount of taxes I pay suddenly change? Do I, as a heterosexual married man, suddenly become a threat to society because a gay couple gets married? If not, then how exactly does a gay marriage undermine my marriage?
The family unit in America is not being threatened by gay people. It's being threatened by people getting married on a whim, the staggering heterosexual divorce rate, parents who aren't involved in the lives of their children, and other issues that are clearly on the shoulders of heterosexual, often (but not always) church-going people. These people aren't necessarily evil, but when looking for the cause of some of the major ills in this country, hold up a mirror before holding up a pointing finger.
As a side note, gay people getting married are for the most part taking themselves out of the gene pool. (For the record, I believe a faithfully married gay couple should be allowed to adopt children, have children via artificial means, etc. This last comment was tongue-in-cheek for the anti-gay-marriage crowd).
--- saint - married, happy, unaffected by any choices you make that don't directly involve me.