Is gay marriage unconstitutional?

So few states worded laws to ban homosexuals from marrying it is a wonder to me you did fight to end any ban for any reason.

But you whine over what a couple states did.

 

So you think that Margaret and Richard Loving were 'selfish' because they sought to upset marriage laws against mixed race marriage but didn't advocate that 5 year old's should be able to marry 45 year olds?

 

People are free to marry anyone they like. I saw a guy marry his horse once. Licensing and regulating relations between a man and his horse would ALSO be an expansion of government.

 

Lots of states worded laws to specifically exclude homosexual couples from marrying- which is of course why they went to court.

Now, what I wonder is why you equate the marriage between two consenting adults to the marriage of a 5 year old girl to a 50 year old man.

 

I have bent over backwards not to make that claim you just blamed me for making.

I see no protest from you over a 5 year old boy marrying a 50 year old male homosexual.

 

Ah yes- because in the twisted double speak of Conservatives the marriage of two consenting adults is exactly the same as a man marrying his horse...

 

The quote is from the district court decision. The one that was re instated when the Supreme Court overturned the appellate courts decision.

 

You continue to appear to equate the marriage between two consenting adults with the marriage of a 5 year old girl to a 50 year old man- why can't you tell the difference?

Without going back to your quote- because I don't feel like it- you listed a series of marriage restrictions- including marriage age restrictions that you equated with the restrictions on same gender marriage.

So again- why do you equate the marriage of a child, unable to provide consent- to an adult(regardless of the gender of either) with the marriage of two consenting adults.

By the way- I am opposed to the marriage of any person who is legally unable to provide consent.

 

and what you like to ignore is that the US constitution trumps state constitutions. a state can't violate the 14th amendment in it's own state constitution.

 

So the Supreme Court never said that.

Thanks for finally admitting it.

 

Can you show us the wording from those states proving what you just said?

When you stop beating your wife, i can handle your false claims.

Look, you claim to be married to a woman. You allege a long loving marriage between you and her.

Why you pick up this issue to fight over bewilders me.

In my case, having two children of my own, but marrying two women that collectively had 8 kids, I know about why marriage is vital to the children.

Were I in your shoes, I would promote the man to the woman sucking it up to have a long life for the sake of the family unit.

Bear in mind, I never filed for a divorce.

I realize some will blame me for both divorces though I did not file, but the simple fact is for the first woman, she took up with men where she worked. I was very hard working but she also had a evening shift and got her loving at the company.

Wife 2 was intensely devoted to her church. I on the other hand shunned her church. But tried not to do so in a way to cause her upset. But in 3 years of her wanting me at her church, I got there maybe 2 times. She on the other hand told me she never would attend my church. Her church leaders came to our home intending to convert me. i told them right off that I was a member of a church and had no thoughts to abandon mine. I to this day believe her church pressured her to leave me.

 

14th amendment.

 

I hope you don't mind this inquiry.

When you are facing a person, and they tell you things, do you really talk back to them like you talk back on this forum?

I never talk to any human in person the way the left talks to posters here.

- - - Updated - - -

Inserted in as a matter of race.

- - - Updated - - -

Inserted in as a matter of race.

 

uh, what?

 

Lets see even ONE!

 

It is the foundation of the decision.

 

LOL- is this really how you talk to people outside the forum?

Do you regularly in a conversation blame things on 'the left' or 'the homosexuals' as you do here?

When someone expresses support for marriage equality for gay couples do you normally also ask them if they support the rights of children to marry adults?

 

I never claimed it did. That was YOUR strawman. Congratulations, you've knocked down yet another strawman in your endless supply of strawmen.

 

And it is still unconcerned about sexual orientation.

The limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples may long have seemed natural and just, but its inconsistency with the central meaning of the fundamental right to marry is now manifest. Pp. 12–18.

(3) The right of same-sex couples to marry is also derived from the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection.


Excluding same-sex couples from marriage thus conflicts with a central premise of the right to marry. Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, their children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser.


It follows that the Court also must hold—and it now does hold—that there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the ground of its same-sex character.

 

AB 607

From the enactment of legislation in 1971 to replace gendered pronouns with gender-neutral pronouns, until 1977, California Civil Code § 4100 defined marriage as "a personal relation arising out of a civil contract, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary." This definition was uniformly interpreted as including only opposite-sex partners, but, because of worries that the language was unclear, Assembly Bill No. 607, authored by Assemblyman Bruce Nestande, was proposed and later passed to "prohibit persons of the same sex from entering lawful marriage."

- - - Updated - - -

The 14th Amendment applies to all Americans regardless of race- and was intended from the beginning to apply to all Americans.

 

Yet you defend the bans still in state laws.

Absolutely amazing. That and you keep malicious posting that i allege I am pro children marrying adults.

I note how you fib to the forum on what I do say.

 

OK, you do not reply to questions. I get it.

- - - Updated - - -

Note to self

Why am I still talking to the homosexual group?

Are they saying new things?

Well no

Am i saying new things

Nope

Time to locate other threads. This is like shoving water uphill.

 

No mention whatsoever of homosexuals. You are making my point and contradicting yours.

 

Good! That's all we gays want, is to be left alone and let this frigging argument go. You don't have to like it or approve of it, you're entitled to your opinion.

 

I sure remember when in this country saying Gay means one is happy.

You sure don't sound happy to me.