Gay marriage: Why not?

[InfiniteNow]

I am pretty sure that the vast majority of citizens are beginning to realize that this issue is only brought up to distract the people, and bring out around election time those who will vote purely on one or two hot button issues... but tell me,

What are the reasons used to support and justify laws which might be enacted to prevent marriage between homosexual partners?

[Zythryn]

Excellent question and thread!
I am curious myself, as none I have heard actually hold up to examination.

It sure does work as a distraction though, works like a charm

[TheBigDog]

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

I am pretty sure that the vast majority of citizens are beginning to realize that this issue is only brought up to distract the people, and bring out around election time those who will vote purely on one or two hot button issues... but tell me,

What are the reasons used to support and justify laws which might be enacted to prevent marriage between homosexual partners?

You have the issue on its head. Same sex or "gay" marriage has always been illegal. The forces of change at work are not trying to make it illegal, they are trying to keep it illegal. Nobody is being repressed by new legislation, there is resistance to change in legislation.

The exception to that is the Constitutional Amendment which is pure politics.

There are all sorts of restrictions on marriage. Minimum age is a law in every state, but that seems to be OK even though kids are apparently discriminated against. You can only be married too one person. You can only marry someone when thye are fit to consent to the contract (no REALLY crazy people, no comatose). And in every state the marriage must be presided over and signed for by someone licensed by the state - can't just claim you are married. You cannot marry your immidiate family (I am pretty sure that includes adopted siblings). In most states you cannot marry your cousin.

And you have to marry someone of the opposite gender.

Here is a link to all US marriage laws.

Bill

[infamous]

Originally Posted by TheBigDog

You have the issue on its head. Same sex or "gay" marriage has always been illegal. The forces of change at work are not trying to make it illegal, they are trying to keep it illegal.

Bill

Quite right BigDog, and one other good reason: The vast majority of American citizens are against it. I personally think that's a pretty good reason....................................Infy

[Zythryn]

Most of Americans are also currently against the war in Iraq, should we outlaw that?

While taking a poll of how Americans feel about a subject is benificial to politicians 'spin' machines, it is not necessarily the best way to govern.

At one time, it was against the law for two people of different races to marry.

So, what are the underlying reason this it is a good idea to not allow two people that love each other to marry?

Some limits are in place, I would agree with many of them. But even these have changed over time as society changes and grows.

In terms of marraige performed by clergy, I don't believe any clergy members should be required to perform a ceremony (marraige or otherwise) that is against their religious faith.

Just my 2 cents

[infamous]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

Most of Americans are also currently against the war in Iraq, should we outlaw that?

Currently only a slight majority but never-the-less, a majority. In a Democracy, majority rules sooooo, I vote for the peoples right to make these decisions based upon the prevailing popular mood.............................Infy

[HydrogenBond]

Marriage is an ancient tradition as strongly rooted in human culture as religion. It would make sense for gays to be sympathetic to this heart felt tradition and opt for another word to describe the social status they are looking for. Most people would be sympathetic to a new label, since they would not become a victim of a minority. The gays could still get the very same practical results that the marriage laws provides.

[TheBigDog]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

At one time, it was against the law for two people of different races to marry.

The race issue was entirly different. It is against the law to descriminate on the basis of race. The laws that you allude to did not ever apply to all states - something about the United States that is too easliy forgotten.

Homosexuality is different. It is an act, a chosen lifestyle, a behavior. If one has impulses to be gay, and they do not act on those impulses, then they are not gay. If one has impulses to be a different race, it doesn't matter how they choose to act, they are the race they are born into.

How a person chooses to act should not equate them with people who were discriminated against just for being born. The gay community is making strides in getting their chosen lifestyle more widely accepted. But in the end it is a choice. I don't care what people say about "born gay". In the end it is defined by the act, not the impulse.

Bill

[Jay-qu]

Originally Posted by infamous

Currently only a slight majority but never-the-less, a majority. In a Democracy, majority rules sooooo, I vote for the peoples right to make these decisions based upon the prevailing popular mood.............................Infy

that would be terrible, today gay marriage is legal, tommoro not

It was adam and eve not adam and steve... I dont really care what they do, but it doesnt seem 'right' to me

[Edella]

Originally Posted by TheBigDog

There are all sorts of restrictions on marriage. Minimum age is a law in every state, but that seems to be OK even though kids are apparently discriminated against. You can only be married too one person. You can only marry someone when thye are fit to consent to the contract (no REALLY crazy people, no comatose). And in every state the marriage must be presided over and signed for by someone licensed by the state - can't just claim you are married. You cannot marry your immidiate family (I am pretty sure that includes adopted siblings). In most states you cannot marry your cousin.Bill

Your obsevation that there are restrictions on marriage misses the point.The question is:what are the reasons used to support and justify laws which might be enacted to prevent marriage between homosexual partners?Age of consent,ability to understand the contract,licencing,etc.,is not the issue.There have been past restrictions on marriage I'm certain we all would disagree with.
In 1967, the Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia struck down the last of the anti-miscegenation laws in the United States.That wasn't very long ago.

The fact that there are restrictions on marriage has nothing to do with whether certain restrictions are fair or not.

And you have to marry someone of the opposite gender

Can hermaphrodites get married?