Gary Johnson Gary Johnson believes "marriage equality" is a constitutionally guaranteed right.

[TheGrinch]

Judge Napolitano is correct on this. There is supreme court precedence that says that states governments cannot prohibit marriage based on discrimination. This was in a case about interracial marriages, but clearly applies to intrasex as well.

I'm not even sure Dr. Paul agrees with this though, because I thought he wanted it to be left to the states.

 

[BuddyRey]

The Constitution isn't a list of things the people are allowed to do...it's a list of things the government is allowed to do. And regulating marriage in any capacity is not one of those things.

 

[erowe1]

Freedom of religion, marriage is a religious ceremony.

Oh, you mean the sentence in the Constitution that starts by saying, "Congress shall make no law..."?

 

[erowe1]

All people being treated equally within the eyes of the law seems like a no-brainer to me. Suggesting that a contract cannot be valid based upon the sex of the people contracting is bizarre at least.

It's not about a contract being valid. It's about making the state itself one of the parties of a contract.

 

[James Madison]

I'm assuming 'marriage equality' doesn't include polygamists.

 

[AlexAmore]

I'm assuming 'marriage equality' doesn't include polygamists.

Some are more equal than others.

 

[FrankRep]

What part of the constitution does he cite for this argument? Is it the 14th amendment? Something else?

It's not in the Constitution, Gary Johnson is smoking crack. Marriage is a state issue, not federal.

 

[dannno]

Gary Johnson is right. Equality in marriage essentially = the first amendment.

 

[Origanalist]

The Constitution isn't a list of things the people are allowed to do...it's a list of things the government is allowed to do. And regulating marriage in any capacity is not one of those things.

That was the idea. Didn't stop the bastards though.

 

[Dr.3D]

A lot of married atheists would disagree.

I doubt they actually got married either. I'll bet they went before a judge or justice of the peace and that ends up just being a civil contract.

 

[Origanalist]

//

 

[Origanalist]

I doubt they actually got married either. I'll bet they went before a judge or justice of the peace and that ends up just being a civil contract.

State sanctioned partnership.

 

[Dr.3D]

State sanctioned partnership.

Pretty much that. Gay people should be able to do the same thing.

 

[Origanalist]

Pretty much that. Gay people should be able to do the same thing.

Why not? When that is all it is?

 

[Dr.3D]

Why not? When that is all it is?

Exactly! What people object to, is calling it a marriage. Just call it what it is and everything would be fine.

 

[Origanalist]

Exactly! What people object to, is calling it a marriage. Just call it what it is and everything would be fine.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Dr.3D again.

Us grumpy old geezer's have to look out for each other.

 

[mczerone]

All people being treated equally within the eyes of the law seems like a no-brainer to me. Suggesting that a contract cannot be valid based upon the sex of the people contracting is bizarre at least.

Get government out of marriage and see how quickly this issue just disappears. So long as there are privileges given by the government to those who enter the contract of marriage it is unjustifiable to not apply the law equally.

Perfect. +rep

 

[mczerone]

Pretty much that. Gay people should be able to do the same thing.

What about religious/Christian gay people? There are many churches out there that accept homosexuality. Should they be forbidden from marrying people where the couple and the church all consent to the formation of the marriage?

 

[Dr.3D]

What about religious/Christian gay people? There are many churches out there that accept homosexuality. Should they be forbidden from marrying people where the couple and the church all consent to the formation of the marriage?

Hey, if that church goes along with it I could care less.

 

[erowe1]

What about religious/Christian gay people? There are many churches out there that accept homosexuality. Should they be forbidden from marrying people where the couple and the church all consent to the formation of the marriage?

No, they shouldn't. Is that even an issue? Is there any place in the country where churches have been prevented from doing that or punished for it?