The right's dangerous legal argument

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-13-2008
The right's dangerous legal argument
1537
Thu, 03-05-2009 - 9:46pm

Appearing for the supporters of Prop 8, Kenneth Starr, the former Whitewater prosecutor, said the people hold the right to modify the state constitution by adding or subtracting protections for civil rights.


Court appears ready to uphold Prop. 8



Full length fiction: worlds undone


"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson


"You think you know, sir!" ~ Cornflake Girl ~ Tori Amos.


Full length fiction: worlds undone

"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-22-2009
Mon, 04-06-2009 - 5:01pm

>>> One can talk about cats and fish all day long. It changes nothing.

Hopefully that's true, and marriage will remain uncorrupted.

>>> Full equality is where this country is headed. It won't be much longer now.

Headed? It's there now.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2009
Mon, 04-06-2009 - 5:07pm
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-04-2005
Mon, 04-06-2009 - 5:51pm

I'm sure I've already tsk tsked you for bringing logic into the mix.


iVillage Member
Registered: 01-22-2009
Mon, 04-06-2009 - 7:41pm

>>> How does allowing equality in marriage take rights away from heterosexuals?

By fundamentally altering the institution of marriage.

>>> It's not an either/or deal.

It is in California...and in most other states as well.

>>> If gays get married, heterosexuals can STILL get married.

And if heterosexuals can get married, gays can have an equivalent in civil unions.

>>> Were not talking about a bus, we're talking about EQUAL access to the bus.

Gays aren't denied access to any public transportation. They're also not entitled to fundamentally alter our social/religious institutions.

>>> Being forced to ride in the back is not equal access. But, you knew that already.

Personally, I'd rather take a taxi. The gay couple can take a limo...both will get you to your destination.

>>> Equality will win. Sooner than many believe.

I'm sure there were folks in California who felt that way last May.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-22-2009
Mon, 04-06-2009 - 7:51pm

>>> If the government were forbidding one group from buying one kind of truck while letting others buy the truck and insisting that as both are trucks there was nothing wrong with keeping those folks from buying that truck your analogy would be apt. As it is, it isn't.

Um...yeah...ok...but gay couples aren't forbidden from buying a truck, they're forbidden from participating in a social institution because they don't conform to the definition and tradition of that institution...just as others are forbidden form participating for similar reasons.

>>Oh...so you want to take away rights from heterosexuals. I see.<<

>>> Take away rights? I thought your argument was that civil unions and marriage had the exact same rights. Nice to know you understand they do not.

Of course they have the same rights...but they are two different things. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman. Gay couples do not conform to that definition, which is why civil unions are the appropriate instrument for them.

>>> And no, I'm not suggesting any rights be taken away. I'm suggesting all rights from the government come with a civil union. Full legal rights at the state and federal level.

I'm sure most conservatives would be happy to hear that a civil union full of rights comes along with their marriages.

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2009
Mon, 04-06-2009 - 8:13pm
iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2009
Mon, 04-06-2009 - 8:16pm

>>I'm sure most conservatives would be happy to hear that a civil union full of rights comes along with their marriages.<<


If this is a surprise to most conservatives they are far less bright than I give them credit for.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-04-2005
Mon, 04-06-2009 - 8:46pm

You didn't answer the question.


What rights are taken away from heterosexuals if gays are given equality in legal marriage?


Please list ANY specific right that heterosexuals will lose.


iVillage Member
Registered: 01-22-2009
Tue, 04-07-2009 - 1:59am

>>> How does allowing equality in marriage take rights away from heterosexuals?

By fundamentally altering the institution of marriage.<<

>>> Which rights are lost?

The "right" to their traditions and institution of marriage.

>>And if heterosexuals can get married, gays can have an equivalent in civil unions.<<

>>> And separate but equal is unconstitutional. Still.

Not in California.

>>I'm sure there were folks in California who felt that way last May.<<

>>> The folks in CA still know this to be true.

The people spoke in November.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-22-2009
Tue, 04-07-2009 - 2:02am
If homosexuals turn all "legal" unions into "civil unions" then heterosexuals would lose their right to marriage.

Pages