[quote]JR249 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
But there is no gay marriage amendment to the federal constitution so it’s not unconstitutional. And the founders would be horrified at such a notion. They’d consider my views radical and ultra liberal.
[/quote]
Marriage is a state issue but the 14th Amendment opines that “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Not allowing homosexuals the same legal benefits as heterosexual married couples is near impossible to defend, legally, based on the pretext of that amendment. This was the same amendment used by the Supreme Court to strike down legal bans on interracial marriage (i.e., anti-miscegenation laws) in the landmark Loving v. Virginia case in the mid-1960s.
Granted, the historical background is different where interracial marriage bans are concerned, which is why the appellate courts have cautiously interpreted its application to same-sex marriage cases, BUT you can’t make the argument that disallowing same-sex couples the same privileges as heterosexual couples, be it in the form of a marriage or civil union, is a deprivation of the liberty of said consenting adults (liberty of choice in a marriage partner with applicable equal benefits )sans the due process of law.
On a side note, I think the word homophobia is poorly applied to debates like this. Most people likely do NOT have an irrational fear of homosexuals or same-sex sexual behavior, even those that have a personal, moral objection to said behavior; therefore, implying that someone is a homophobe is a brass assumption that someone has an anxiety disorder in the form of a phobia, which is a rash judgement unless you are a clinical psychologist who has diagnosed that person. I think the misuse of the word does everyone a disservice on both sides of the argument and, quite frankly, it’s a standard ad hominem crutch that usually has no place in a legitimate debate.
[/quote]
I’m not against giving legal rights to gays in same sex unions. I’m against recognising same sex marriage. To recognise same sex marriage is to change the very definition of what marriage is, and has been for thousands of years. Pursuit of happiness could be interpreted as almost anything. Should we allow a father to marry his adult daughter by mutual consent? They’re just pursuing happiness right? I agree with you about homophobia. The Greek phobos means fear. However in modern parlance a homophobe is used to refer to someone with a hatred of homosexuals.