CuriousPuppy
Posts: 51
Joined: 6/20/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Voltare
[
Curious,
Before I address your points, do consider the arguementative value. I'm not overly attached to my position, but rather demonstrating that the issue simply is not as black and white as you appear to illustrate it.
Cocaine is illegal. You may not own, sell, distribute, or manufacture cocaine without appropriate permits and government authorization (for example, medical research, or police who maintain possession of such controlled substances for evidence, etc.) I won't address how this became a law or the motivations behind it - but rather point out that we make cocaine illegal, because the public body (as voiced through our democratic process) has deemed it unfit for public consumption. As someone used the same example in another thread, if a drug dealer is selling drugs to other consenting adults -it doesn't seem like it's my problem, until the drug deal goes bad and they pull out guns to shoot each other. It's not my problem, until the user starts breaking into homes to steal televisions and jewelry, to pay for his coke habit. It's not my problem, till when he's high on coke, he slams into a telephone pole, and spends the rest of his life in a coma hooked up to a respirator, while my tax dollars pay for his seven kids to grow up without their father.
While those are all potentially very valid reasons to keep cocaine and other illegal drugs illegal, all of your examples end up with physical damage or loss to people and/or the community. Physical damage/loss to others and/or the community is not caused by same sex marriages... well, not unless you count the cost of a marriage cerimony and the bank account of the folks who paid for it... hardly the same thing though ;)
Also I don't want you to think that I singled you out specifically because you were the first person I quoted. I chose to quote you in my first post to this thread, because you raised the only potentially valid point, and that potentially valid point was full of holes that most people don't realize (i.e. right to visitation in hospitals, challenges to power of attorney/wills/etc, etc).
quote:
This is, to me, a valid arguement for people who do not believe in same sex marriage from a legal perspective. The expectation is not to prevent gays or lesbians from living together (laws on the books that try to prevent this aside, as they aren't usually enforced any more then the 10cent per head rat law in Michigan.)
You mean like it wasn't enforced a few months back with that antisodomy law, and went all the way to the supreme court before texas was told to get it's act together and take said law off the books? ;)
quote:
The expectation is to try to allow legislation to reflect the moral health of the society at large. Unfortunately, there is no clear way to define what moral health entails, save by consensus of the population at large. If Democracy is rule by the will of the people, then it stands to reason that the will of the people would be reflected by the laws they choose to enact, or not enact. Laws specifically designed to regulate the issuance of marriage licenses reflect this will - and if there is a political and moral will of the people to change these laws, then that is what happens. I'd bet dollars to pennies that if I lived in a state that had 40% gays or lesbians, that that state would pass an amendment to it's own constitution permitting it. And lets not forget, that historically, marriages between brother and sisters were permitted in Hawaii.
You also are not the first to mention democracy being "the will of the people"... Hate to tell you Voltare, but the US is not a democracy... it's a democratic republic, and it's a democratic republic because the original founders were terrified of that "will of the people" being unleashed without control on the minorities they didn't like. We all remember that part of history class on why there were so many religious colonies that fled to the US hmm?
quote:
So, again, the issue returns to the issue of what is important - the ceremony or the blessing of the state upon the ceremony. Insurance companies, for example, are starting to cover 'life mates' or 'domestic partners' within certain guidelines to reflect the changing attitudes in society. Perhaps one day state sanctioned civil unions will permit anyone who wishes to be legally married (or enter in a union of some form) to do so. It is not the government's responsibility to directly contravene the will of the people - and I would hardly consider lack of legal sanctioning for a lifestyle choice to be 'preventing' that choice. If gays and lesbians (or any other group of people in a democratic country) wish for a law to be enacted, the burden falls upon them to make use of the legal system they have availible to them. Propaganda, advertising, and advocacy are what change peoples minds and attitudes. Stomping your feet and saying "ITS NOT FAIR" doesn't win a lot of supporters, in my opinion.
I have a feeling that you will see one of two things happen... and the folks trying to blow smoke and claim a reason for not wanting to allow same sex marriages other than god, will be left with a situation they very much dislike. Either the supreme court will eventually lay down the law and say not allowing same sex marriages infringes on the rights of the citizens... or the folks wanting to try and push descrimination through onthe lawbooks will eventually find that state will no longer issue "marriages" and will instead issue "civil unions" (or something similar), after someone argues that using the term marriages causes the state to endorse a religion... if for no reason other than revenge.
quote:
To address the long hair arguement - if long hair was deemed a public health hazard, and made illegal, by the will of the people in the country, then it stands to reason that fair or not, this is the will of the country. Democracy, something we claim to be the best thing since sliced bread and have spent endless dollars to spread amongst the world, works this way. If you don't like the laws of a country, of course, you're welcome to try to effect change, or find another one (coming from an American living abroad in Chile mind you.) In fact, this is the very reason that there are hair regulations in our military - for hygine purposes. Marines don't expect to have much chance to get showers when they're spending two months in a tent, you know. We don't let people walk naked on our streets, because it's offensive to our morals, and because of religious roots, many cities and states have laws prohibiting the sale of an otherwise legal substance - alchohol - on Sunday.
See, you go into that whole "if" thing again when you talk about long hair... unless you can somehow explain how same sex couples being married are somehow a "public health hazard", then that particular argument might be comperable... but as it stands, you might as well be comparing oranges and 747 jetliners... just as you were with the argument about illegal drugs leading to physical damage/loss being a reason that same sex marriages should be illegal.
And funny you should mention that no alchohol on sundays thing and it's religious roots... if you look around, you will find that a lot of places have pulled said law off the books for that exact reason. And here you have a group of folks trying to put another law on the books for the same exact reason.
quote:
Seperation of Church and State is considered a fundemental element of our constitution. Unfortunately, freedom of religion is often confused with freedom 'from' religion. I'm free to believe what I wish. You, dear reader, are free to believe what you wish. I may practice what I wish, so long as it does not infringe on you, and you are allowed to practice as you wish so long as it does not infringe on me - within certain allowances and accomodations. You like drinking beer on Sunday (and secretly, I do too even if I'm not supposed to do it.) So naturally, it bothers you that because my religion says I shouldn't, that I have voted to prohibit these sales. It infringes on your right to drink beer! (and my right as well, even if my religion says I shouldn't!) This violates seperation of church and state?.... Actually, no. I chose to (well, our great grandfathers actually) make it illegal to sell this substance, based on a belief that sunday should be spent doing other things then drinking beer. The motivations might have been religious - but the vote is still political. The church can exert every effort it can to cause every one of it's members to vote a certain way - just like the United Auto Workers can encourage voting blocks, or even MacDonalds by putting a picture of George Bush on every whopper wrapper if it wants. I am FREE to vote, in accordance with my religious beliefs. You are too! If you want to drink beer on Sunday, you have the legal means to effect it. Claiming that it's an immoral law that prevents you your constitutional right to drink is fine. Claiming that it is a violation of church and state seperation leaves you with no foot to stand on, because quite simply the pope didn't make the decision to vote it out, I did.
While it's all very nice for you to bring up that whole seperation of church and state/seperation from church and state and that freedom of religion/freedom from relgion argument... the second doesn't exactly hold water when you are bringing it up over an attempted law that is driven largely by hate and religion... the first... well... I think most of us who remember history class remember a certain church sending a letter to a 'founding father' about being worried about how their church might be affected/pressured by the government, and his answer about how he was a firm believer in keeping the church and state completely seperate in all aspects....
Oh, as to the church pressuring members to vote a certain way... you are wrong... when they cross the line, the irs bitchslaps them and revokes their tax free status for a while ;).
< Message edited by CuriousPuppy -- 7/22/2004 6:12:31 PM >
|
RE: Defeat of constitutional amendment - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread