National Vote on Gay Marriage?

their tax code involves them in marriage

 

So you're saying the 16th amendment. Brilliant.

 

im saying the federal government is involved in marriage

 

I would advocate to simply get government out of marriage. Problem solved. Have another slice of pizza and move on with our lives.

 

free men do not need the governments approval on love, marriage, between anyone is none of the governments business.

- - - Updated - - -

Fix the tax code.

 

It's too bad you're not a fee man then, isn't it.

 

You are right, no one in the US is truely free, we can thank republicrats for that

 

I swear to god this user is a bot.

 

plenty of other laws as well. hundreds in fact

 

This is most likely going to be a moot point once the Supreme Court rules on this issue.

If it rules that gay marriage bans are unconstitutional, that will effectively legalize gay marriage nationally.

If it rules that they aren't, then it will remain a state issue.

 

Anti gay marriage proponents don't have an argument which deserves consideration.

 

Oh, so it has Constitutional authority to get involved in marriage because it is involved. Circular. You're sounding smarter and smarter by the post.

 

There is no provision in the constitution for a Nationwide referendum. First you'd have to pass an Amendment that allows for them. Good luck with that.

Same Sex Marriage will be the law of the land by the time I assume room temperature, assuming I don't get hit by a bus too quickly.

 

Haha, now that's something impossible to find in the constitution's enumerated powers: the authority to set policy on marriage. Leave it to the states. Who cares if states are different, liberty and variety made the United States great. Government is best when it's most representative, and it's most representative at the state level.

Why? There isn't in the states its already legal in.

Let these states have the policy most representative of its citizens, and let Texas have its policy most representative of its citizens. The very last thing traditional marriage types should want is for marriage to be decided at the Federal level. You're going to lose that battle sooner or later. At the state level you could hold out in the red states indefinitely.

Let competition between states provide incentives for creativity and models for good government in the same way that the free market does for individuals. Return your polity to being a free market of ideas where the well governed states thrive and spread these new ideas to other states should they too desire it. At the same time let other states filled with less idealistic folk hold off for now and see how it goes into the future. Why force policies onto those who don't want them?

 

There is no such thing as marriage between people of the same sex, even if a state declares it is so.

The state might as well pass a law saying a square is the same thing as a circle, or that 2 + 2 = 5, or that up is down.

The state can't take a falsehood and make it true. It does not have that power.

 

"Marriage" in its legal usage is simply a term to describe a collection of rights, benefits, responsibilities and privileges. In that sense, there is NO reason why it can't apply to two people of the same sex. In real terms, the argument you are making here means nothing.

 

Thats the whole trick of politics, creating political topics and problems one after the other that instils fight (always pro or anti) in the people/voters, this is how they gain votes/power (because people want a problem to be solved and keep voting even harder) and some problems will cause demonstrations, eventually all this can lead to a revolution, which in not in advance of the people's freedom (once they have a majority in a fighter modus a revolution can occur)
In Europe you see this revolutionary processintensifying, this begun in Iceland with the bank scandal, later Greece and Spain (declining economy, loss of jobs, banks), and currrently in France the anti gay marriage demonstrations. Every time a large amount (mass) of people is affected by a problem. An what is distinct is that in Germany you don't (yet) see these problems and demonstrations, there you see the rise of a popular president, because does a good job compared to the other European countries, also a way to organize masses of people)
Politics does not solve a problem, instils fight (and fear) in more and more people since the beginning of this new millenium/turn of the century.
Fear and fight igniting politics and news for twelve years has caused all the trouble that is going on, all that trouble can be solved very soon, but they need a majority of fighting people (behind a party/politician), so they won't start to solve the problems soon.

 

A square and a circle are defined by inherent criteria. Math is math. You cant violate the laws of physics. But marriage is a product of, and defined by, government. It means whatever the government says it means.

 

No, marriage is defined by the natural law, and is far older than any religion now existing or any state. Marriage is as old as mankind itself, and there is no way to change what it is. Different societies defined the rights and customs surrounding marriage differently, but all agreed that it is a bond between a man and a woman. There is no way any state can add or subtract from that definition, which is inherent in what makes us human.

 

14 countries and 9 States say you're wrong. Oops, now it's 15 and 10. And growing. How is that possible?

 

The laws of man are often at conflict with the laws of nature. And when that happens, there is an unbalancing in the universe. The homosexuals, with their endless demands, are unbalancing the universe, and the result could be the fall of Western civilization.

 

Shouldn't that have happened already??

 

nobody has managed to challenge it.

 

I'm pretty sure we ruled out the whole mob rule thing, because it didn't work out so well.

 

There are no "laws of nature" other than that which is impossible via the laws of physics. If you mean to say your imagined laws of god, then say that. Bringing nature into it is silly when homosexuality occurs in every species.