Gay Marriage

[El Barto]

Monday is the day when it becomes legal in Massachusetts. Several towns on Cape Cod are going to marry out-of-Staters. All court challenges have failed.

Is anyone here going to get married on Monday?

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Please. I'm on my 3rd marriage already. I don't think marrying someone of the same sex is going to solve my issues. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[ACPlayer]

Hey, you never know! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Philuva]

By Tuesday, the sanctity of all heterosexual marriages will be destroyed. I have been married for almost 3 years, but now that gays are allowed to be married, I'll be lucky if my wife and I make it until the weekend. What were those crazy Massachusetts judges thinking?

Seriously, does anyone really care if gays get married?

My friend had a good idea. He said that if the US ever passed a constituional ammendment banning gay marriages, he would get a divorce from his wife. He didn't realize when he signed up to get married, it was some exclusive club the government had control over, so he wants out. It would be a nice gesture when the gov't tries to preserve "the moral fabric" of this country by trying pass such an oppresive law, it results in a spike of un-wed couples living in sin with children out of wedlock. That would be funny.

[BirthdayBoy]

Is anyone here going to get married on Monday?

Why yes, I'm marrying my true love, Simon [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]




And Monday is my Birthday!

[MMMMMM]

I don't have a problem with them getting married but I do have a problem if the courts have overstepped their bounds for what perhaps should have been a legislative choice. Not sure since I have heard both sides of the story pretty well argued.

Also, I do have reservations about same-sex couples having children. It seems very presumptuous to state that a child does as well with two mothers or two fathers as with one mother and one father. No major studies have yet been done on the subject. I for one don't see how it could be "just as good", but that doesn't mean that SOME same sex couples might not be better for a child than SOME traditional couples. However it is too soon to tell what effects this might have on a child's emotional development or psychosexual development. It is known that a child's feelings towards the opposite sex are often influenced in some ways by the child's parent of the opposite sex. With same sex couples, the child might not have a pasrent of the opposite sex, or conversely might not have a parent of the same sex to talk about guy or gal things growing up.

I just think people are presuming way too much about this, and the stupid PC movement of course eggs them on, shunning any critical-thinking approach that might conflict with the preordained PC world view.

All that said, I could give two hoots if they get married, but let's be sure it is not a case of activism from the bench, which has increasingly been a problem for many years.

Whether the end result is something you agree with or not is not the point, because next time it very well might what you don't like. What matters is whether our laws and decisions are arrived at constitutionally, as that is the only way to ensure protection for everybody in the long run.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

The Mass Court ruled that the legislature had violated the State Constitution, Isn't that the job of the Court? Checks and balances.

[MMMMMM]

Yes I've heard that argument. The contrary argument is that laws regarding marriage are supposed to be matters decided by the legislature not the court.

If the courts can simply overrule any law, ordering the legislature to make a specific new law in its place, then in essence the courts wield the ultimate power. Where does it end, theoretically? What use is there then for a legislature, if the courts can destroy any laws and order new laws made? Might as well have only courts and no legislature, if there are not restrictions on such powers of the courts.

If you have justices who are prone to activism from the bench, who also have the power to overturn any laws and order legislatures to create new specific laws, then what you really have is rule by the judicial branch. And since there is no way to ensure the absence of judicial activism, what is the constitutional safeguard against all of our laws eventually being decreed by unelected fellows in black robes? And why isn't that constitutional safeguard applicable in this case (or is it?)

[Sundevils21]

Does this mean pretty soon were are going to now see 2 "married" men/women, making out in McDonalads while there 5yr. old "daughter" plays in the playplace? Is this going to be the common sight for my children?

[andyfox]

Married people rarely make out in public. It's usually the unmarrieds that do it. What's worse about your five year old seeing two women making out than seeing a man and a woman doing it?