Free debate at NCC on Same-Sex Marriage - Do We Need a Federal Marriage Amendment?

[Radar]

By altering the marriage law from being exclusively for one man and one woman into something else, you are saying that whatever reason exists behind that law is invalid. This is no small change.

If we are talking about changing definitions, once you allow that the change is possible, you have to ask how far the change should go.

The reasons behind anti-gay laws preventing them from exercising their right to marry whomever they choose ARE as invalid as laws against interracial marriages were in the past.

Marriage is a right, not a priviledge. And if government will sanction or recognize the marriage of any group it must recognize it for all groups of consenting adults.

If any people want to marry each other, the government has no legitimate authority to deny them access to marriage or to treat their marriage differently under the law. It wouldn't matter if 8 people wanted to marry each other and 4 of them were related, nobody has a right to prevent their marriage.

ALL AMERICANS have the same rights regardless of thier gender, age, religion, race, etc. and nobody (including government) holds any authority to tell them whom they may or may not marry.

Even calling it something other than the word "marriage" would be a violation. Even using a different form would be a violation.

Nobody is redefining marriage. Marriage has ALWAYS been the union of people who love each other and it would continue to be such.

Marriage ceased being a purely religious ceremony the moment the first civil marriage was performed. I find it really funny when people say they want to protect the "institution" of marriage. As though gay people getting married would do anything to harm an institution where 2 out of 3 couples get divorced.

[Lady Sidhe]

Originally posted by Radar


The reasons behind anti-gay laws preventing them from exercising their right to marry whomever they choose ARE as invalid as laws against interracial marriages were in the past.

Marriage is a right, not a priviledge. And if government will sanction or recognize the marriage of any group it must recognize it for all groups of consenting adults.

ALL AMERICANS have the same rights regardless of thier gender, age, religion, race, etc. and nobody (including government) holds any authority to tell them whom they may or may not marry. .

Nobody is redefining marriage. Marriage has ALWAYS been the union of people who love each other and it would continue to be such.

Marriage ceased being a purely religious ceremony the moment the first civil marriage was performed. I find it really funny when people say they want to protect the "institution" of marriage. As though gay people getting married would do anything to harm an institution where 2 out of 3 couples get divorced.

OMFG! Ummm...don't flame me anyone, but, um...I have to agreewithradarhere *ducks*


Sidhe

[Radar]

It's the first time you've agreed with a libertarian philosophy on a position.

[Lady Sidhe]

I don't think it's so much the Libertarian philosophy, but just the idea that marriage shouldn't be restricted because of prejudice. Either way, I agree with what you said.

Sidhe