what is new is the sanctioning of homosexual behavior by the state. this is unprecedented in history. the state should remain hands off in all aspects of this matter. best, surfer
You're talking out of your ass - no pun intended. It's not new. There were sanctions against it for 100 years. Such restrictions are not consitutional now. The issue is marriage, btw.
there is no historical precedent for the state sanctioning of homosexual marriage. the state has no right condoning nor restricting homosexual behavior. the sanctioning or condoning of the behavior would be by marriage. what is it you don't understand ? surfer
As "slamma" pointed out down below the issue IS marriage...and nothing else. The state is not sanctioning behaviors in either heterosexual or homosexual marriages, only the establishment of a union between two people. The state has no business in ANYONES bedroom. This is a civil rights issue, and the establishment of these sort of unions will surly come to pass just as women's right to vote, women's right to choose, slavery, antimiscegenation laws repealed and the like. Like it or not.
I'm no lawyer, but AFAIK "freedom of contract" is protected in the US constitution. There are some exceptions, such as public safety, but I don't think homosexuality is mentioned. Since marriage (at least the civil kind, recognised under law) is a legitimate legally-binding contract between two people, it would appear to fall under this protection regardless of the sexuality of those involved.
Marriages occur all the time between non-religious people. Presumably this is not a matter for the church?
i agree that the state has absolutely no right in anyone's bedroom. however, marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman. marriage is also a state sanctioned contract. do you propose changing the definition to fit your criteria ?? it is not a civil rights issue. i don't have the inclination to explain this in detail in this forum. best, surfer
All legal contracts are state sanctioned, being backed by the full force of the law. There is AFAIK nothing in the present contitutional law which prevents two homosexuals signing a legal contract governing the division of property, income, responsibilities regarding sexual behaviour, treatment of children (if any), and so on - in other words, similar if not identical responsibilities to those of the current state-sanctioned heterosexual form of marriage. If such a contract were to be signed, then it would be called "marriage" by the parties to the contract, and referred to as such by large portions of society. Your position would enable a distinction to be drawn between state treatment of "heterosexual marriage" and "homosexual marriage". For example the state may treat the two differently for taxation or benefit reasons. However, it would not allow the state to "stay out" of homosexual marriage contracts. Breach of contract would have to be enforced, just like the breach of any other legal contract. The state would, due to the obligation to equal treatment under the law, be de facto legitimising homosexual marriage. In fact one could argue that this has only not happened so far because no two homosexuals have signed such a contract and had case law judgements made on its enforcement. Once that happens, gay marriage will effectively be introduced by the courts - it would enter by the back door, so to speak
Because gay couples raising children is going to mean an exponential rise in the number of faggots in America. How can people not see this? Isn't it obvious that gay couples are going to raise their kids to believe that "there's nothing wrong with being gay"? And that they'll, in general, encourage their kids to "explore their sexuality". And when these kids do start exploring their sexuality -- cos, afterall, "daddy and daddy do it all the time" -- and the parents of straight kids get all wound up about it -- as any sane person would -- then the faggot just system is going to come out and say, "no, no, these kids have a right to explore their sexual preferences" and then then the faggot educational system is going to add fuel to the fire by encouraging further "exploration" and before you know the whole thing is out of control and in 100 years time we'll be reading "The Decline and Fall of Heterosexual America". Think, people, think. Look ahead. Of course, some moron is going to have to give me the standard faggot carp about homosexuality being "genetic" when there is absolutely no proof of this and very strong evidence that it is indeed a choice that is more self-reinforcing the more one engages in it. So, as a community, we should have the right to be able to influence the shape our society takes. And if the vast majority of society believes homosexuality is disgusting and/or "wrong", then we have a duty to see that our kids don't turn out faggots.