I went to my aunts lesbian wedding this summer. I got hammered, chased tail with said lesbians, and had a blast.
-
Back to my roots
-
In my paper I basically have to define what the legal definition of marriage is using only what has been printed by the government. This is what makes this so hard and why I need to be so technical about what words mean.
Under the Defense of Marriage Act signed in 1996 by Bill Clinton, we are provided with a working definition of marriage as the union between one man and one woman. http://www.lectlaw.com/files/leg23.htm
The generally accepted meaning of the word marriage has always implied one man and one woman... but, in our day and age that seems to be changing. So, how does our legal system accomodate that?
Then, without factoring in personal opinions or values, I have to decide whether or not it would be constitutional to accept a revised definition of marriage to include couples of the same sex. The 9th and 14th amendments basically say that everybody should have equal rights http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitut....overview.html. These are the things that tyro liberals are going to start screaming in your face. However, studying those amendments, it does seems unconstitutional to deny the definition of marriage to couples of the same sex since people of the opposite sex can get that "title" or whatever you want to call it.
But what it comes down to, since the federal government cannot legally recognize a same-sex marriage, is that perhaps it should be a state's issue. The Defense of Marriage Act supports this. However, it does not say that any state must recognize a same-sex marriage. For instance, my state of Michigan does not even though Massachusetts does and [i think] there are legal implications for a same-sex couple if they move to Michigan. However, this seems to fly in the face of the Full Faith and Credit clause that says every state must recognize the public acts, effects, etc, of any other state. But, does this include marriage?
So, there seems to be some major contradiction here, which is what makes this an interesting topic for my government class, and it all comes down to what words mean and how the government can use them. To me, if we are going to stick with how DOMA defines marriage, accepting marriage as the union of a same sex couple is simply bad logic. To me, it's like saying an apple is an apple, but an apple can also be an orange. So, do you see where I'm coming from psloan? The definition of marriage that Fidhle007 posted is purely a modern adaptation of the word marriage, adding the word "same" to it in order to accomodate the sensitive feelings of homosexuals...
The current Marriage Proposal Act of 2007 would federally define marriage as the union of one man and one woman, effectively ending the argument for good. But, this forces states like Massachusetts to withdraw their definition of marriage. If that happens, liberals are obviously going to start screaming bloody murder against how evil the federal government is.
I guess what is important to me is maintaining clear language. I have to admit that I don't outright oppose the "union" of gays or lesbian. If anything I truly support it because I think they deserve the benefits our government offers to normal married people. Giving gays the right to call themselves "married" seems like a very small thing to ask. But, it just doesn't feel right to me; it is too big of a change to the concept of marriage and it how it's related the human experience of male and female coming together to have kids and raise a family in the traditional way so that's why I would just like to keep things defined the way they currently are.
My values stem from mostly logic, where I think whakiewes and I see eye to eye on most things. Homosexuals are obviously regular people just like you and me. But I think the liberal science community needs to stop underestimating how important the traditional family is to raising kids. (bottom of second page: http://www.psych.org/edu/other_res/l...ves/199818.pdf) Notice how it only says "qualitative differences." Well, what does that really mean? http://www.citizenlink.org/pdfs/fosi...lth_of_SSF.pdf It is a huge change to society to suddenly introduce a new concept of marriage. There are countless studies affirming how vitally important the traditional family is to the well-being of society.Comment
-
I'd love to hear you explain this further. Do you see a way this will effect you? I don't, but I'm willing to hear your view. I may be in the dark here, but aren't all people allowed to persue happiness?
Hate to break it to you, but if you can't explain it in rational terms & you wave the "God & religion" flag, then you better go back & read the Bible a little further. Christian love is just that, love & acceptance. Don't alienate someone, there may come a day they change their tune & even if they don't no one can blame you based on your conduct toward them.
It's not how you handle the good times, but the faith you keep in the bad that defines you.Comment
-
Honestly, i think they are better suited to have children that 75% of couples. You know why? They are willing to go out of their way to adopt children - all the while knowing the scrutiny they will have to endure. If you want something that bad I can't imagine that you will treat it poorly at all. Compare that to knocking up some chick you've known for 2 months up and keeping it. You have 9 months to figure out what to do - GO!"We praise or find fault, depending on which of the two provides more opportunity for our powers of judgement to shine."Comment
-
Just a side note - kids these days are spineless, immoral pussies."We praise or find fault, depending on which of the two provides more opportunity for our powers of judgement to shine."Comment
-
Comment
-
"We praise or find fault, depending on which of the two provides more opportunity for our powers of judgement to shine."Comment
-
Me personally, I don't want my kids being raised in a society where homosexuality is told to be okay. I don't want my kids to grow up in a society where premarrital sex and abortion are told to be okay. I don't want my kids to feel that they have to CHOOSE between heterosexuality and homosexuality. That is how it effects me. I could care less if I am standing beside a homosexual. Body for body, they are the same person. But in private life, they are making decisions that I don't agree. Since I don't agree with them, I don't want them preached onto my children as being acceptable; its not.
In America, people by definition have the right to pursue happiness. Many find this in the form of homosexuality. That doesn't make it right. That isn't a cause for changing our laws, our text books, and our history. Do you want to be recognized as a country with a homosexual President; a President with no balls. We are a country of progress. We always have been. In the last 50 years though, we have digressed. Crime rates per capita are at an all time high, abortions are at an all time high, bastard homes are at an all time high, and preached homosexuality is at an all time high.
I don't mean to be so hash about it, but people keep flipping different religion and legal cards. Religion has no bearing in the matter, and legally its illegal by definition. Just because illegal immigrants come here and work hard, promote the general welfare, and for the most part don't commit crimes, they are still ILLEGAL. Homosexuality has never been accepted by the masses. There is a reason why people have to 'come out'. People need to stop being middle road, let everyone else think for them kind of people, and formulate your own opinions. Would you want your child to spend the night at a homosexuals home? Would you want to have a lesbian teacher telling your children that her decision was the best she ever made and they should think about it? Do you want it to be in our history books that there was a 2007 homosexuality movement? Do you want a man to proposition you because its legal for him to and he does not know if your gay or straight? Most importantly to me, do you want your kids to have to decide whether or not they should be gay or straight solely on the basis that their friends are and its accepted? These are the topics you need to decide; not, well if they want to they can. Its not that easy.
Yes, when it comes to the right time, I will introduce my kids to alcohol. Yes, I will give them the birds and bees talk, and explain that if they make the choice to partake in premarrital sex, then to be responsible and discuss the reprocussions first. Yes, my kid will be taught how to hunt and how to properly manage and secure firearms. I can tell you that my child won't go to public schools given the current curriculums (vs. when i attended), and my child won't be told that homosexuality is okay. So yes, will making homosexuality legal effect me, of course.
When I get back from working today, I am going to get out my case law books and cite the reprocussions of same-sex marriage. Its not in the interest of anyone except those who are concerned only with themselves. I am concerned with my childrens future, and my childrens childrens future. I can make do.
Wes
P.S. This should startle some uneasy stones. I am going to put my bulletproof vest on today :) .Comment
-
^^^
He said what I wanted to say :) I was on lunch though.
Comment
Comment