Gay Marriage, the End of Democracy in America?

[SBrad001]

Interesting article by Orson Scott Card, author of "Ender's Game".

I don't agree with him in the least on his views of gay marriage, but his points on how courts are pushing the boundaries of our democracy is interesting.

http://mormontimes.com/ME_blogs.php?id=1586

Discuss.

[TRNDRVR]

Page one! http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1974_eating_popcorn.gif

Where's Trail-axe?

:D

[fscrig75]

Not really sure how I feel about gay marriage, but I do agree that the courts are getting out of control.
I never understood why there can't be a vote on new laws, or revisions to laws.
We all ranted and raved about Gun control but when the Supreme Court overturned the DC law, why couldn't they just have a day for all legal residents of the city to vote and let the majority decide? Yea you get into vote tampering and who is and who isn't a legal resident. Also voting should be done on the weekend, that way most don't have to skip out of work to go do it.
If a gay marriage is legal in one state but not legal in another state and that couple moves to that state how will it effect work benifits or divorce laws?

[JNickel101]

It pisses me off that these public servents have nothing better to do - pushing back and forth over gay marriage. This country has far more important problems that their time should be more focused on....

[Darky]

I'll just stay out of the gay marriage side and say that I agree it's irritating to have the courts overturn the voters' will. I thought that's why we voted? :shrug: And that would apply to anything, although I wouldn't comlain if it was something that served my interests ;)

[JNickel101]

I realize we're a system of checks and balances - but who's checking the judges? Other judges? They seem to take it upon themselves as individuals to make "important" decisions....

Kinda like a dictator....

[TheAlmightySam]

Keep in mind, though, that this is really a civil rights issue, in the same way Jim Crow laws and segregation was a civil rights issue. Now, I am in no way comparing those who don't want gay marriage to segregationists - that's not what I mean - but those who support gay marriage see this battle in the say way as those who were for African American equality in the sixties saw their battle.

In the case of segregation and Jim Crow, it was not the voters who overturned the laws and helped foster equality. It was radical protesters who brought the issue to the forefront of the attention of the courts, who overturned the laws. The courts did it, not the voters.

Is this the way America should handle civil rights issues? No, of course not. But, precedent has shown time and time again that on civil rights issues, the will of the people has not been to do what's right, but to continue with the status quo, even if today we agree it's absolutely wrong. Slavery in America was not abolished by a vote, it was abolished by an executive order. Women received the right to vote from the House of Representatives, not from the people. African Americans began going to white schools by a court order.

I'm not the kind of person who wants to see the courts changing laws at their own whim, but I'm also not the kind of person who sees the American public voting for what's right and fair over the status quo. In these cases, it is up to the courts to decide the constitutionality of these laws.

[fscrig75]

What would be nice is if a sitting judge was doing such a horrible job that he could be impeached. Then they would starting making decisions actually based on the opinions of the masses and not based on their personal adgenda.

[Darky]

The only thing I'd say to the civil rights issue is black people were born black, women were born women (well most of them these days...), homosexuals were not born homosexual. I'm not going to debate that because its been done many times here, and I haven't seen any sort of conclusive proof. I'm not saying that gay people are disgusting perverts by using this comparison, its just the easiest one to come to mind: The courts/laws don't allow for NAMBLA to practice what makes them happy (legally at least) because their disposition is not a matter of "I was born with it and can't change", it's a decision. Again, I am in no way comparing homosexuals to disgusting child rapers, just pointing out that just because a person's lifestyle choice is different from the rest, it doesn't necessarily require government protection.

And as a shocker to those I've debated this topic with before: Legally speaking, I don't disagree with gay marriage. I'm not for it, but I wouldn't deny it, from a purely legal standpoint. From my own personal beliefs, of course, I am against it. :)

[RichP]

If a gay marriage is legal in one state but not legal in another state and that couple moves to that state how will it effect work benifits or divorce laws?

Yes, it does have an effect, one 'couple' I read about on CNN transferred from one state that had the law that required health insurance companies to provide coverage for your significant other even if not married, they transferred to Utah or Idaho, within the same company, which has no such law and the companies insurance company pulled the other guys coverage, it's in court now. Was it right to do that, IMO, NO it was not and his company should have backed them.
As for gay marriage, I don't have a problem with it, they have a much higher divorce rate though than hetro marriages and as far as I'm concerned if they want the tax and health benefits they should also have the headaches of divorce too...
As for gays, no problem there either, by definition they are a self canceling generation, no off spring, Darwins law.

[JNickel101]

I think a lot of people confuse "right" with "privilage"....

[TheAlmightySam]

Darky, I understand your personal beliefs from our previous conversation, and appreciate your respect for the difference between what can be made law and what is a personal belief. Cheers for being one of the few.

There is no, and at least for some time, will be no evidence whether or not gays are gay due to nature or nurture, but, living in Portland, I know a lot of gay people. Every one of them had no choice in the matter - they just are attracted to the same sex. They didn't wake up one morning and say, "Gee, I like boys today," in the same way that you didn't choose to be attracted to women.

I don't know if it's genetic, or whether people "become" gay by virtue of how they were raised, or what, but I don't know a single one who consciously chose to be the way he or she is. To quote a gay friend of mine from Seattle,

"It's much easier to be straight. If we could choose to be straight or gay, don't you think we would all just choose to be straight to avoid the years of ridicule, to avoid trying to find a partner out of the few gay people out there, to avoid having to do battle for years and years to marry the person we love, and to avoid knowing we'll never be able to have children with the partner we love?"

[fscrig75]

Yes, it does have an effect, one 'couple' I read about on CNN transferred from one state that had the law that required health insurance companies to provide coverage for your significant other even if not married, they transferred to Utah or Idaho, within the same company, which has no such law and the companies insurance company pulled the other guys coverage, it's in court now. Was it right to do that, IMO, NO it was not and his company should have backed them.

I do agree with that. But if they had moved and the state didn't didn't recognize their union, and they also transfered to a different company that doesn not have a HQ in the other state, then they are ass out.

[Bent]

This place sure has become over run with queer huggers.

[RichP]

Darky, I understand your personal beliefs from our previous conversation, and appreciate your respect for the difference between what can be made law and what is a personal belief. Cheers for being one of the few.

There is no, and at least for some time, will be no evidence whether or not gays are gay due to nature or nurture, but, living in Portland, I know a lot of gay people. Every one of them had no choice in the matter - they just are attracted to the same sex. They didn't wake up one morning and say, "Gee, I like boys today," in the same way that you didn't choose to be attracted to women.

I don't know if it's genetic, or whether people "become" gay by virtue of how they were raised, or what, but I don't know a single one who consciously chose to be the way he or she is. To quote a gay friend of mine from Seattle,

"It's much easier to be straight. If we could choose to be straight or gay, don't you think we would all just choose to be straight to avoid the years of ridicule, to avoid trying to find a partner out of the few gay people out there, to avoid having to do battle for years and years to marry the person we love, and to avoid knowing we'll never be able to have children with the partner we love?"

I firmly believe it's the way you were born, over the years I've seen children grow up and the funny thing is my 'gaydar', which is usually pretty accurate, sees it show up around puberty. I've had gay friends and a couple in the family by marriage and I get and got along with all of them, I also served with quite a few and had no issues, we just went to different bars on liberty :D

[ECKSJAY]

This place sure has become over run with queer huggers.

tolerance, lol

[ECKSJAY]

I firmly believe it's the way you were born, over the years I've seen children grow up and the funny thing is my 'gaydar', which is usually pretty accurate, sees it show up around puberty. I've had gay friends and a couple in the family by marriage and I get and got along with all of them, I also served with quite a few and had no issues, we just went to different bars on liberty :D

I have a cousin who is and we all thought something was up when he was into Barbies at age 5 on up... GI Joe was very bored with nothing but girls around when we'd visit. Nobody did anything different and he'd refuse to play with anything else. He loved calligraphy, horticulture, and interior design. He acted like a total queen and would tap you on the shoulder, "Oh Phillip, STOP!" Imagine our shock when 20 years later we heard he was gay. :jester: His brother turned out 'just fine' and they were raised exactly the same...

[JNickel101]

x2, there are quite a few who get by in the service with that "don't ask, don't tell" policy floating around.

Although one thing troubles me...there was a guy in my last squadron who we all swore up and down was gay. Had all the typical "gay stereotypes" (especially the way he talked)...but then...

He was busted for child pornography last year and is now in Leavenworth.

[Bent]

..but then...

He was busted for child pornography last year and is now in Leavenworth.
They should do a DNA test. If he is genetically predisposed to be a pedophile he should be let out and the charges dismissed. Wouldn’t it be unfair to punish him if he has no choice in his sexual preference?

[RichP]

x2, there are quite a few who get by in the service with that "don't ask, don't tell" policy floating around.

Although one thing troubles me...there was a guy in my last squadron who we all swore up and down was gay. Had all the typical "gay stereotypes" (especially the way he talked)...but then...

He was busted for child pornography last year and is now in Leavenworth.
Sounds like he never matured :D

One interesting thing you will find out as you get older, the older you get the more attractive older women get. That to me is just normal.

The child bit, just can't get my brain around that. There has to be some kind of short circuit in pedophiles brains, to me that makes them dangerous, as dangerous as an armed robber or serial killer. I think trying to cure a pedophile is about the same as trying to cure a gay, ain't gonna happen, thats just the way they are wired. In the case of a ped a bullet is the best solution for societies and child safety. I've seen, heard and read over the years of all the kids who were damaged by priests, ministers, teachers, coaches, etc.

An interesting side note, when the draft was around many of these people went into those career choices as they were exempt and you got an automatic deferment. Some things in life make a lot more sense to me than when I was a kid. I'd have to say half my HS teachers were flamers, voice, gestures, clothes, etc but I was too young and stupid to recognize it back then, now I know.

[Bent]

An interesting side note, when the draft was around many of these people went into those career choices as they were exempt and you got an automatic deferment.
Hmmmm, that's an interesting notion.

[SBrad001]

They should do a DNA test. If he is genetically predisposed to be a pedophile he should be let out and the charges dismissed. Wouldn’t it be unfair to punish him if he has no choice in his sexual preference?

There's now way that you can legitimately compare homosexuality to pedophilia. One is between consensual adults and the other victimizes children.

[kdailey4315]

What would be nice is if a sitting judge was doing such a horrible job that he could be impeached. Then they would starting making decisions actually based on the opinions of the masses and not based on their personal adgenda.

That's a great idea but it opens another can of worms. Who will decide to impeach a judge? What will be grounds for impeachment?

[Bent]

There's now way that you can legitimately compare homosexuality to pedophilia. One is between consensual adults and the other victimizes children.
THAT can depend upon what the gay “parents” raise the child to believe is normal and acceptable. This whole gay rights propaganda is merely the tip of the proverbial life style iceberg.

:skull1:



EDIT: I can compare them, do compare them and will continue to do so; not only to pedophilia but a host of other "sexual preferences" that for the time being are illegal.

[JNickel101]

Challenge him to a potato-sack race. The judge vs a member of the Legislative branch vs member of the Executive branch - names chosen at random from a hat. If the judge loses, he's gone.

[SBrad001]

THAT can depend upon what the gay “parents” raise the child to believe is normal and acceptable. This whole gay rights propaganda is merely the tip of the proverbial life style iceberg.
:skull1:

More pedophiles come from married, heterosexual backgrounds than anywhere else. Sure, there are homosexual pedophiles, but there are just as many, if not more pedophiles that prey on girls. Pedophiles come form all walks of life.


Beside, this is a tangent as to the idea behind this thread. I think this is a good example of how it's possible that our judicial branch is circumventing our legislative branch. Sometimes, this might be a good thing, such as the case of the desegregation, but in this case, the voters had their say and now judicial branch has overturned that bill.

I am pro-gay marriage, and I had my vote. Who am I to force my minority views on the majority of voters through judicial activism? I'm just not sure it's the right way to go about things.

[Bent]

More pedophiles come from married, heterosexual backgrounds than anywhere else.
Brady, that wasn't my point.
;)

[SBrad001]

EDIT: I can compare them, do compare them and will continue to do so; not only to pedophilia but a host of other "sexual preferences" that for the time being are illegal.

Fair enough.

So now I have a question for you.

Do you think that an otherwise straight guy should be allowed to 'cornhole' his girlfriend. I suppose the real question is whether it's the sexual act or is it the attraction between members of the same sex that you find fault in?

[SBrad001]

Brady, that wasn't my point.
;)


I know. All I'm trying to point out is that we have just as many farked up deviants on our hetero side of the fence as they do on their side of the fence. I don't think there's a credible link or comparison between the two.

[Bent]

...members of the same sex that there is fault in?
Bingo! Homosexuality; add to that pedophilia, rape, slavery, prostitution...

[WB9YZU]

Back to the original premise of the topic, and that is, are our courts perverting the democratic process?

I believe some of them are, just as some other civil servants are taking laws and perverting them to address issues they were never intended to address.

I do not believe there is a "Gay" or Homosexual equal rights issue, and I believe it is inappropriate to apply laws intended to eliminate bias based on a persons ancestry to issues of personal sexual preference.

Marriage in this country, and most countries has two parts; religious, and legal.

The religious part is where a man and a woman pledge themselves to each other and promise to be faithful, raise a family, and pass those values on to their children. As such, the concept of "Gay Marriage" is a farce as most religions do not accept the concept of a Marriage as being different than the traditional Man & Woman, and are not likely to in the future.

Then there is the "legal" status of marriage which has nothing to do with any of the above items, but has to do with money and property responsibility's and divisions.

This whole "Gay Marriage" issue is not about religion, or civil rights, but is about the legal status of marriage, which carries with it a whole series of benefits that have nothing at all to do with the "condition" of being a Homosexual.

Laws are meant to be enacted by the majority of people, and not a minority in this country. They are also created by the people, and not renegade administrators who decide to get a bug up their ass and defy the laws they were hired to administer, or adjudicate. That the "Gay Rights" movement in this country has been able to put people in places of power so that they could abuse the trust we placed in them as public servants is impressive; and damn scary.

[Starboard M]

This place sure has become over run with queer huggers.
I have no problems hugging lesbians.....:sad1:

[Bent]

I do not believe there is a "Gay" or Homosexual equal rights issue, and I believe it is inappropriate to apply laws intended to eliminate bias based on a persons ancestry to issues of personal sexual preference.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

[SBrad001]

Laws are meant to be enacted by the majority of people, and not a minority in this country. They are also created by the people, and not renegade administrators who decide to get a bug up their ass and defy the laws they were hired to administer, or adjudicate. That the "Gay Rights" movement in this country has been able to put people in places of power so that they could abuse the trust we placed in them as public servants is impressive; and damn scary.

Bullshit.

The laws of this nation are enacted to protect the minority from the majority. Once a upon a time the majority thought it was 'right' to subjugate minorities because of the perceived superiority and responsibility of the Caucasian race, but our judicial branch stepped in and changed that.

[8Mud]

Bullshit.

The laws of this nation are enacted to protect the minority from the majority. Once a upon a time the majority thought it was 'right' to subjugate minorities because of the perceived superiority and responsibility of the Caucasian race, but our judicial branch stepped in and changed that.

Religion is partly to instill similar values in a group of people. Laws often work pretty much the same way, forced conformity.
If the methodology of laws worked perfectly, society would totally conform. And then we would all be flocked.
IMO most of the laws are passed to benefit the ruling class, designed to herd the flock.
IMO the only real barrier between us and total control, is the Beer Nuts crowd and if they ever grow cotton balls, and the non conformists are finally made to totally conform, society will stop evolving and become stagnant.
Some people just don't herd worth a darn and IMO society is better off for it. I for one don't trust the ruling class to herd me in a beneficial direction, more often than not there bright ideas don't work out in the long run. There agenda and mine are often not mutually beneficial.
I'm not advocating anarchy, just saying the other extreme can be just as bad if not worse.

[WB9YZU]

Bullshit.

The laws of this nation are enacted to protect the minority from the majority. Once a upon a time the majority thought it was 'right' to subjugate minorities because of the perceived superiority and responsibility of the Caucasian race, but our judicial branch stepped in and changed that.

Not BS, but they way things are meant to work.

I believe your example is a poor one as there was already a "law" on the books that recognized that one "man" is equal to another. It just took time for people of color to be considered "men", and that, is what the Judicial system is good at, definition.

I find your interpretation of why laws are enacted to be flawed,
Laws have been traditionally been enacted to protect the majority of people from the minority.

Look at any law and you can see who it was written to restrain. Consider these...

* Laws against murder protect the majority from the minority of killers.
* Laws against not screwing cows protect the sensibilities of the majority from the deviant activities of the experimental minority.
* Laws against sodomy were meant to protect the majority of people from the health issues of infecting your stick with nasty bacteria and feces. It was also intended to protect the sensibility of the majority who found that activity offensive.
* Laws against speeding protect the majority of drivers against death on the highways.
* Laws against jay walking are meant to protect the majority of people from motorists by crossing at predictable and well marked places.

[Trail-Axe]

Page one! http://www.clipartof.com/images/emoticons/xsmall2/1974_eating_popcorn.gif

Where's Trail-axe?

:D

Page three!!!

Shut your piehole and give me some of that damn popcorn! :D