MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
My position on DOMA was "Why legislate marriage at all? Keep your government out of my personal relationship.".
Legislating morality
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
I doubt it.
But anyway, your support of a "a particular state's licensing law" is not consistent with your desire to "keep your government out of my personal relationship."
The word government does not mean FedCo. It means government at every level. Your views are not consistent and you apparently are attempting to obscure them with a sloppy use of the language.
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
Prove otherwise. Again, you don't get to make my position up.
The difference is that you can easily move from one state to another, so if you don't like the licensing laws, move.
Canceled.2014.1
New member
While some of your "goal posts" have been consistent for decades, this particular viewpoint has not. You have argued with me on several occasions that the gov't has a vest interest in the institution of marriage and in the defense of straight marriage.
Prove what? That you have contradicted yourself? I already did that. A state licensing law is an act of a government. You can move out of the country, it does not make Federal law a private action or not an act of government.
MAGA MAN
Let's go Brandon!
States have the interests of their citizens for enacting licensing laws, and yes I support that, because I can always move. It's not so easy to move out of the country.
Canceled.2014.1
New member
Canceled.2014.1
New member
So I have to prove what you said?
BTW, that quote was from MLK, JR.
Canceled.2014.1
New member
Or what? You will go on knowing what you said?
Canceled.2014.1
New member
Nah, you get used to weird obsessions by posters here. I'm amused by your obsession with me.
Canceled.2014.1
New member
He used to post under SouthernMan and DamnYankee.
Thanks. I thought so. I wanted to give the new guy the benefit of the doubt, but SouthernMan/DamnYankee ain't entitled to it.
At first blush I agree with your sentiment, however upon closer look it is clear why marriage is and will continue to be a legal compact defined by the State. There are literally thousands of federal and state laws that refer to married people or marriage agreements. Additionally there are thousands more Administrative procedures and rules relating to marriage.
We have a population that contains many subsets of people who are uneducated and or unintelligent, but still have children and love relationships. A set of rules that prescribe marriage rights and duties protect these people and their children. We don't force people to get married, but the government does give certain rights to those who do, and even if they don't know or understand all the protections the marriage provides them, they know they are entering into a legal relationship with the other person.
People can enter into altered marriage agreements, that is, they can have pre-post nuptial agreements, but the vast majority of the population cant afford to have a lawyer draw up all aspects of their relationship, and thus they simply get married.
We have an entire social structure built upon the legal protections offered by what is "marriage". That structure is constantly changing, and the law clearly evolves. You cant simply cut the legal marriage out of this system and tell people to draw up there own agreements, that might be where we are heading, but it would take decades of legal evolution to get there.
State governments are still governments and your support of their licensing laws contradicts your claim of a desire to "keep your government out of my personal relationship." You fully support legislating marriage. You just oppose the protection of the Bill of Rights and 14th amendment against discriminatory laws.