We should keep things the way I believe they should be because I think they’re traditional, and they’re traditional because they’re the way I think they should be.
Never mind that “traditional” marriage has changed repeatedly over the centuries, or that it varies from society to society and generation to generation. Never mind that I cannot even explain why “traditional” automatically means “good.” Never mind that what is traditional is demonstrably not always what is best for a society.
Nope, forget all that. I say (my conception of) what is traditional is the best and be damned to anyone who disagrees.
ETA:
You are, as always, entitled to your opinion, however utterly wrong it may be.
.
Since the question of gay marriage is pretty decisively being answered by both the judicial courts and the court of public opinion, what do you plan to do? Assuming that things continue as they are, and in the next few years large majorities support gay marriage (which will probably be legal everywhere), what are you afraid will happen?
The goals are to BE MARRIED. So yes, it’s necessary.
And you are dead wrong when you claim that all the benefits of marriage are available to people through other means. That’s bullshit. And if it were true, there’d be no reason to get married in the first place, even for heteros.
(It’s funny that opposition to gay marriage has created a backdoor, no pun intended, way of weakening hetero marriage by prompting employers and governments to give benefits to couples without the necessity of being married to get around it though).
I have read some of the most absurd, convoluted ‘logic’ in decisions written by judges. It is nauseating.
This issue is *not *one of ‘rights being denied to a minority’ or ‘unfair discrimination’ and I cannot believe that any judge falls for that sort of argument…
Please read the post again. There’s not an argument in favor, there’s an acknowledgement that you’re likely on the losing side of this fight. Assuming that you are, and SSM becomes legal everywhere, * what are you afraid will happen?*.
The assertion ‘you might as well give up because you are going to lose’ is used as a psychological ploy. It doesn’t work with me. It’s not an argument.
I am not afraid of what will happen thereafter, I am afraid what will happen in doing so: the loss of the electorate’s sovereign authority. Judges have no right to override referenda. None! Thee were constitutional amendments, and thus they remake the constitution, and cannot be ‘unconstitutional’!
We already know how you feel about it personally. Based on what I’ve read in this thread I’m very skeptical that you understand the legal reasoning behind those decisions. Tell me how this legal battle is different from the Supreme Court overturning bans on interracial marriage in the 1960s, for example.
What do you think the issue is? Why do you think gay couples, especially those of us who have together for over a decade (and in many cases 2, 3, 4 or more decades) are seeking the right to a legal marriage?
Those laws did not reflect thousands of years of human history and were plainly racist.
I don’t know whether it has actually not been ‘illegal’ for men to marry men, or women to marry women, so far as I know. It was ‘common knowledge’ that this was not a marriage. It was ‘understood’ what marriage was and that ain’t it.
So if your only concern is Constitutional (and, respectfully, you have a lot to learn about Constitutional Law) and the sovereignty of the electorate, why bring up the whole “tradition” thing?
It’s not an argument, dude. I was asking you a question. If you don’t want to answer, just say so, but don’t play these pretend philosophy games. Sometimes people ask questions because they actually want to know your answer.
Nope. There are plenty only available to married couples. And to replicate the rest without marriage can require lots of paperwork and thousands of dollars in legal fees.