Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianCoyote I'm sitting with a decent buzz going, and I got to thinking about that gay marriage law they just enacted in California. I've tried to weigh both sides of the issue, dissect both arguments.
What it comes down to is ... I think ... banning gay marriage is basically punishing people for being gay. "You're not right, so you don't get the right to be like everyone else."
They say society will collapse if we let the gays say their vows, if gay people get married soon people will want to marry cows and seventeen people at once... But ... isn't that the same argument they use for legalizing weed? Society will collapse ... all hell will break loose and crime will skyrocket and cocaine and heroin and all the other devil drugs will take over the world!!!
...
That's how I feel. Am I totally off base here? |
Elizabeth Taylor has done more to damage the institution of marriage than this court ruling ever will. How many husbands? I think the carpenter, Larry Fortensky, was number eight if you keep track of them as they go by.
When two people love each other and are committed to a stable relationship, they are entitled to the legal status of marriage. The gateway theory, or slippery-slope theory, is just a scare tactic. It was used against women's suffrage. It was used when the military was fully integrated racially. It was used against inter-racial couples.
American citizens are entitled to the same protections under the law regardless of their sexual preference. On the right, the objection is that gayness is a choice so Equal Protection does not apply. That's how someone on the right has the stones to say that a man wanting to marry a sheep will be the next step. Never mind that a sheep has no standing in the courts.
The Constitution protects the rights of the minority against the tyranny of the majority. A Constitutional amendment should never be used as a tool to target the rights of specific Americans.