- Joined
- Mar 3, 2010
- Messages
- 60,458
- Reaction score
- 12,357
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
It doesn't matter how many people share the same opinion since the point was that all law is based on someones opinion.
You're dancing around now. Someone's opinion may be the inspiration for a law but it takes a great deal to get one passed which means a lot of people.
Our constitution is not a personally moral or religious piece of work: it's an ideal drawn from many different sources. So this "opinion" thing you're chasing has no merit.
It doesn't matter how many people share the same opinion since the point was that all law is based on someones opinion.
That's because you're into horses instead.I'm not married so I don't care!
Willing to bet you have to recite the entire oath and that every justice sitting today has. This presumes that God is a fact, regardless of your trying to wiggle out of the point with the different gods mention. Btw, all the members of the court are from the Judeo-Christian tradition. So, no, not a different God at all.
Most developed countries recognize SSM as a right or no different than hetero sexual marriage and as such legally sanctified by the state. Even many churches perform SSM.Yes or no, and why if yes. Please.
How long have you been married?
Did the SSM ruling by SCOTUS somehow change your marriage?
My husband and I are both in our first marriage and have been married for decades. The recent SCOTUS ruling will not affect us personally in any way.
But what I do strongly believe is that the assault on the traditional family as an important and valuable American institution has been further eroded and made unimportant and irrelavent. By SCOTUS now, illegally and way outside its constitutional authority, forcing us to change the definition of marriage and thereby make marriage into something it never was and was never intended to be, more and more young people won't bother with it. We will have ever more children born out of wedlock and be much more likely to grow up without the advantage of the traditional family with a loving mother and father in the home.
Marriage has always been about the children that were assumed to be the logical result of the marriage, and all marriage laws in all 50 states were designed first and foremost to protect the children. You cannot change the definition of something, however, without making that something into something different than what it was.
IMO, while I have always supported the necessity and ability of gay people to have the necessary protections and rights enjoyed by others, and I have no animosity whatsoever to any gay person, the SCOTUS decision has done irreparable damage to the institution of marriage and we as a people, both straight and gay, will be the worse off for it.
What is relevant is that the Constitution is the highest law of this nation, and all public servants are required to act in strict accordance with it; including the Justices on the Supreme Court, whose oath and duty is to uphold it and to issue rulings in accordance with it—a duty which five of the members of that court blatantly violated on this occasion.
Whether or not the Constitution can be described as “a moral or religious document” is completely irrelevant to its purpose and authority.
That's because you're into horses instead.
This is your personal opinion. Marriage has not always been about the children, especially not legal marriage. There is absolutely no damage done to marriage by allowing same sex couples to marry. Hell, even if your contention were partially true and the main reason for marriage was for children, same sex couples raise children, and they do nothing to harm children being raised by opposite sex married people. There are not going to be fewer children born because same sex couples are getting married. There are not going to be fewer happy, stable opposite sex marriages just because same sex couples can legally marry.
I think my opinion will likely hold up against close scrutiny and research than your opinion will.
2013No, apparently it didn't. And I doubt it would in the future, since it hasn't in the past. We have had laws that specifically ban first cousins in some states from getting married only if they can have children. There are no laws in the US that prevent people from getting married if they are sterile or too old to have children or already raised all the children they are going to have. We have had same sex marriage in the US for over a decade now and not only have we not seen a decrease in marriage where same sex couples can legally marry, but we have in fact seen some decreases in divorce, as well as pretty frickin high marriage rates. There is no logical connection between same sex couples getting married and a decrease in children being born, without some serious convoluted studies that have huge correlation equally causation problems.
Marriage was established and defined by God, not by man, and no mortal institution has the authority to override God on this matter. Those who presume to do so will one day stand before God to be judged, and they will be held fully accountable for this evil.
Yes or no, and why if yes. Please.
How long have you been married?
Did the SSM ruling by SCOTUS somehow change your marriage?
I'm single and ready for a pringle
You always forget this line, Bob: "In my opinion, based on my purely individual and subjective beliefs, beliefs that mean absolutely nothing, generally". YOU believe that marriage is defined by God. Guess what? You're wrong. And we now have evidence to prove it. Your lack of acceptance of this is irrelevant.
I sure enjoy reading your posts, Cap. lol
Do you think this might be a good time to ask Bob to prove that God exists before accepting that he?...or she?....or he-she?....defined marriage and not humans by trial and error? Or would the circular reasoning be too much to endure?
Thing is, Moot, I believe in God and am quite religious. But MY God isn't the rigid, hateful, ignorant god that some folks believe in. My God is loving, flexible, understanding, and wise.
Sorry Cap, I didn't mean to assume. I agree, God can be whatever one wants it to be....to a point. Personally, I don't know if there is a God or not so I leave the option open...just in case there is one. But if there is a God, I do not believe that he speaks to anyone outside their own head. Which kinda rules the bible out.
Your God is much better. Which makes you the perfect foil for Bob, so I'll leave you to it.Didn't think you assumed that I didn't believe in God, Moot. Figured you didn't know. It tends to amaze people that with some of my positions, I am also one of the most religious people on this board. My view of God and religious is just inclusive, rather than excluding.
2013
Racial or ethnic group
Percent of births considered "non-marital"
Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders -17 percent
Non-Hispanic whites - 29 percent
Hispanics - 53 percent
American Indian and Native Alaskans - 66 percent
Non-Hispanic blacks - 73 percent
TOTAL - roughly 40 percent in 2013 - up from 31 percent in 2005
CNN's Don Lemon says more than 72 percent of African-American births are out of wedlock | PolitiFact
Since 1970, out-of-wedlock birth rates have soared. In 1965, 24 percent of black infants and 3.1 percent of white infants were born to single mothers. By 1990 the rates had risen to 64 percent for black infants, 18 percent for whites.
An Analysis of Out-Of-Wedlock Births in the United States | Brookings Institution
Rates in 1950 were under 10%
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db18.pdf
Today, better-educated, higher-income adults are much more likely to marry. That means their children benefit from the marriage, and the income, and the education of their parents. Howard and Reeves also point out that the same skills that make marriages work (like commitment and patience) also come handy for good parenting. And so perhaps it's not that children are better off when their parents marry — it's that the qualities that enable successful marriages also make good parents.
...
At the end of the day, marriage itself might still have some effect on the adult outcomes of children. But it would be a small one.
Yes or no, and why if yes. Please.
How long have you been married?
Did the SSM ruling by SCOTUS somehow change your marriage?
That doesn't prove anything about marriage being about the children. Those people being in non-marital, longterm, stable relationships would work for those children almost, if not as well for children, especially if the parents cared to take the extra time to actually care for and about the children (both parents or at least two people). While marriage does benefit children, it has little to do with the actual marriage itself and a lot to do with other factors.
Children with married parents are better off
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?