SA@TAC - Gay Rights or States' Rights?

When a federal judge overturned California's ban on gay marriage, this supposed "victory" was in reality a defeat for the Constitution.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Southern
• Avenger
• The
• American
• Conservative
• California
• Proposition
• Prop
• gay
• marriage
• homosexual
• civil
• union
• 14th
• amendment
• 10th
• states
• rights
• federalism
• Constitution
• commerce
• clause
• supremacy
• medicinal
• marijuana
• pot
• 2nd
• gun
• Coburn
• Kagan

[MinstrelKrampf]

I agree that the federal government has no business in marriage. But I also believe that states don't, either ironic solutions -- Either we ban all marriage laws, or we allow gay marriage.

If we ban all marriage laws, and take away government regulations on marriage, we eliminate the problem, and marriage becomes quaint and out-dated.

If we allow gay marriage, then gay people will be able toshare all the disappointment, pain and suffering that married couples do. ;)

[whiff1962]

Many so-called "liberal" legislation and political movements, past and present, are more so inspired by a political backlash, more inspired by cultural Marxists, than that of truly conservative (and classic liberal) socio-political ideals. There are plenty of "groups" that have been galvanized by the politics of blame and victimhood, and of the need to create a "synthesis" within the mainstream society,i.e., by way of radicalized protest, albeit that respective groups Constitutional right.

[masterriftsgm]

@bassatizemecaptain As a libertarian as well, I'm surprised you even agree with the premise that the government should be involved in any way, shape, or form. What business is it of theirs with whom you engage in a social contract?

[masterriftsgm]

@shamusername Legally meaningless sounds great to me. My marriage is important to my wife, myself, and my family. Everyone else can go take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut as to what they think of it--and that is as it should be.

[whiff1962]

No Constitutional Amendment for present prohibitionism; the war in prosecuted, and otherwise self-determining adults are persecuted, because the war on drugs is as much a war on the individual as it is a culture's metabolism: that of scapegoating the "other". There is only bureaucratic-administrative fiat that has perpetuated this war and scapegoating of drugs and its users. What is more dangerous, ideas or drugs? Shouldn't ingestion of drugs be protected as that of the ingestion of ideas?

[shamusername]

@TiaSaysSo Government still needs to recognize it (in laws, in courts, etc.), otherwise it is legally meaningless. So you either have private voluntary associations that are legally meaningless or you do have legal meaning assigned to them but that automatically means government involvement. You cannot have it both ways.

[bassatizemecaptain]

As a gay libertarian, I do enjoy the concepts put forth in this video, agreeing and disagreeing with them. SA speaks with common sense and truth in the idea of the states' right to decide on marriage legality. However, it should be the moral obligation of the state to allow for all citizens to have the capability for their ideal standard of living, and even if a majority decides against gay marriage, it is doing a disservice to their fellows by preventing the minority from reasonable equality.

[Luigi84289]

The 14th Amendment is a sham. True Free citizens are protected under the body of the Constitution and by their state the only legitimate entity capable of granting citizenship. The federal Government can only grant servitude, make subjects as it overrules it's controlling mechanism in doing so, the states. It sets itself up as a supreme entity. Citizenship is supposed to flow like this; State - - - > Feds (through your state you are member of the union)

[Luigi84289]

@Akatam0t0ma See that's the problem nobody should be getting any federal benefits. People can't help their sexuality. I know that is a very controversial statement right there but we can all agree that less Government and more State control is what we want.

[Luigi84289]

@TheCrookedTimber That is true. We are supposed to have a diverse competitive Union. This is the only way to promote good moral values. People will migrate to other states to get away from bad legislation. it's easy and doesn't hit the wallet 1 millionth as hard as leaving the whole union. It keeps the legislation pure. It keeps the culture of those states stable and secure and keeps the states carrying out the wants of the people there. Personally I love Weed. If I had to go to say Utah I would

[Luigi84289]

Marriage is a religious ceremony it has no place in Government. If two people want to be together I don't care, doesn't affect me and what I think about it does not matter. I am not going to waste time or spend my money and power to stop people from loving each other. It does not affect me. Just because I find something uncomfortable or even have a dislike towards it (which I don't I have found many fine gay people) doesn't make it law.