I think that it's great that the government realized that it shouldn't control people's sexual preference. The constitution guarantees free speech, thought, press; all these ways to express ourselves. We have deemed discrimination by race to be a detrimental practice in our society. Is discrimination by sexual preference any better? What about discrimination by hair color? Favorite soda? No, no, and no. So, I applaud the NY government for making a wise and just decision.
I think that it's great that the government realized that it shouldn't control people's sexual preference. The constitution guarantees free speech, thought, press; all these ways to express ourselves. We have deemed discrimination by race to be a detrimental practice in our society. Is discrimination by sexual preference any better? What about discrimination by hair color? Favorite soda? No, no, and no. So, I applaud the NY government for making a wise and just decision.
The government wasn't trying to control people's sexual orientation, they were preventing them from getting married because of religious background behind marriage.
Also, why do people have to make extreme comparisons to get their point across?
Sixth? While this is great and everything, let's look at the bigger picture.
America is the self proclaimed "land of the free", and yet just over 10% of their states have legalized gay marriage, and the year is 2011. Meanwhile other countries, such as Canada, have legalized it nation wide OR recognize it in some other way. The problem is, Americans have this reputation for being civil rights activists and a place where a person can do and say what they wish, freely (within reasonable confines of the law). However, we come to gay marriage. Not only is this ridiculous to not already be legalized nation wide, it's ridiculous that you go state by state. Is there no power in the Federal Government to legalize it everywhere?
You think Congress has not already proposed this before, Wolf? Legalizing gay marriage has been federally proposed before, but it was shot down. It boils down to the ambiguities of Separation of Church and state that the US contains. If homosexuals were allowed to marry (and there was a post that discusses this in the link posted at the top), then what would the methods be to make the marriage official? Would they use common-law marriages? Or the traditional, ceremonious marriages held in church? If they so choose the latter, the federal government really cannot force said church to allow the marriage to take place there, if they wish to bar access. Because the federal government has an amendment that they cannot make laws based on religion or prohibit the religious from exercising their beliefs (within humane boundaries). It's ambiguous, and the churches can, will, and probably have brought this up. I know, I know, if the state is able to legalize it, then the federal side can as well with no problems. What I'm getting at here is, if homosexuals wish to be wed, you can expect churches to be defiant about it, unless they marry via Common Law. If the churches wish to do no part in helping couples marry, that is their biased decision.
What I'm getting at here is, if homosexuals wish to be wed, you can expect churches to be defiant about it, unless they marry via Common Law. If the churches wish to do no part in helping couples marry, that is their biased decision
This is all fine and good, and it happens the world around, no doubt. However, I believe the American constitution has backed itself into a corner, so to speak. No doubt you will find simillar articles in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the other constitutions in other countries where same sex marriage is legal, however, those countries are not so strict in their religions.
America is a nation founded on religious fundamentals, that's why all those Europeans came to America, to practice religion. But, as a soceity America needs to move past that. Religion, while good for a society, needs to be given the choice to accept the law or decline. Not ALL churches will deny a same sex couple. So, despite the grey area in the matter, why not just pass the law? I mean, aside from American society's fundamentalist prejudices. Either the churches allow the couple to be married, or they don't. So long as the act of a same sex marriage is legal.
Because the federal government has an amendment that they cannot make laws based on religion or prohibit the religious from exercising their beliefs (within humane boundaries).
The other problem is that having gay marriage illegal is a law based on religion.
America is a nation founded on religious fundamentals, that's why all those Europeans came to America, to practice religion. But, as a soceity America needs to move past that. Religion, while good for a society, needs to be given the choice to accept the law or decline. Not ALL churches will deny a same sex couple. So, despite the grey area in the matter, why not just pass the law? I mean, aside from American society's fundamentalist prejudices. Either the churches allow the couple to be married, or they don't. So long as the act of a same sex marriage is legal.
Let's make it as simple as possible, then.
If enough people yell loud enough for long enough, then law will change, for better or worse.
The Catholic Bishops of New York said the law alters "radically and forever humanity's historic understanding of marriage."
"We always treat our homosexual brothers and sisters with respect, dignity and love," the bishops stated Friday, "We worry that both marriage and the family will be undermined by this tragic presumption of government in passing this legislation that attempts to redefine these cornerstones of civilization."
Would they use common-law marriages?
That would do fine. Far as I know it's mostly the legal rights associated with marriage that's being fought for by legalizing it. Even if a church doesn't recognize it at least the state and by extent the country would.
Gay Marriage, should be allowed. Imagine if you was Straight and they banned normal marriage and legilazed Gay Marriage, how would you feel? Just because something in a book says you can't!
Well obviously it's gay, it's GAY marriage. You should explain why in the thread i liked. Well,its just a joke.We talked about it in the original thread in depth i think.
I also noticed this in the news paper, the headline said its also the largest state to legalize it. It also said "same sex" which means this applies to women.
