Find answers, ask questions, and connect with our community around the world.

  • Unknown Member

    Deleted User
    November 12, 2008 at 6:43 pm

    Let me get this straight.  Many blacks voted for Barack Obama in the election.  Many blacks voted for the ban.  Therefore, Barack Obama;’s election directly caused the ban. 

    I can’t argue with your logic on that one!

    All Americans are supposed to have the right to pursue happiness and they are supposed to have equal protection under the law.  The right to enter into private contracts should exist for all Americans, be they gay or straight.  Marriage is a private contract that is witnessed and documented by the state.  Denying gays the right to enter into private agreements simply because they are gay is capricious discrimination that comes straight from undue extremist religious interference in the proper functioning of government.  These influences have no concern for basic American liberties.  It is all about following THEIR VERSION of the “will of God”.  They will gladly kill and enslave anyone who doesn’t share their twisted views if we do not fight them every step of the way.  We can not give them a chance to do that ever again.  Look at history.  It will happen within one generation if we let it.

    You say you want government out of the marriage business, and yet you find nothing wrong with denying a sizable minority of the population (gay people) from entering into a civil contract (marriage).  You would also deny that same large segment of the population all the economic, social and political advantages that come from legal marriage.  Such restrictions on marriage are similar to restrictions against allowing blacks to vote, allowing those of a certain faith from attending certain public schools, or any other restriction of governmental service or benefit solely on the basis of race, faith or sexual orientation.  Such restrictions are obviously wrong.  It is difficult to see how any fair person could deny gay people this basic right.  It is even more difficult to see how a court could deny only gay people such a basic government service.  What is next, denying gay people police services, health services, the right to vote, just because there are enough people who can be brainwashed into voting for an unconstitutional proposition offered outside of due process?

    By your logic, there is no explicit clause in the constitution that allows Indian Americans to marry.  Therefore, if there is a popular vote to not allow them to marry, why should the government stop such an action?  The protections that apply to all humans in the US do not specifically enumerate Indian Americans.  You may think this example is ridiculous.  Who would care whether or not Indian American marry?  Well, what if you have a sizable minority of brainwashed misled tools who do?  Who is going to protect you?  The Supreme Court.  That is the Supreme Court’s job, and it has been doing a fine job of it.  The Supreme Court does not pull rights out of the air.  They know what they are doing, and they are not messing around.

    The US constitution is by the people for the people.  ALL the people.  Gay, straight, whatever.  The basic service offered by the courts to handle civil matters such as witnessing and documenting contracts such as marriage can not be denied to gay people just because they are gay.  That is what the court has ruled, and rightly so.