More Than 7 in 10 Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

[jmdrake]

Sometimes it's necessary for the law to determine who someone's spouse is. For example, if someone dies without a will who gets his property? Most states have statutes that say the decedent's spouse and/or children get it. It's no answer to say the decedent should have had a will, because people die every day without one. So unless the property should go to whoever seizes it first some law has to determine who the legal recipient is.

So.....if the states offered a pre-written agreement that could be signed and notarized that covered all of that, that wouldn't be enough because....? To have a state recognized "marriage" you have to fill out a piece of paper that, without having all the terms written on it, says all of that. Really there is no legitimate reason not to get the government out of marriage.

Other statutes say that a surviving spouse has a claim for damages if a third party wrongfully kills his or her spouse (no such claim was recognized at common law). Many other laws (e.g. filing joint tax returns) have reference to spouses.

Well amend the law to cover that.

The legal issue is whether the government can refuse to legally recognize same-sex couples as spouses while granting such recognition to opposite-sex couples. So far no one has been able to give a cogent reason why it should be able to do so.

[MENTION=1874]Brian4Liberty[/MENTION]'s argument was get the government out of marriage altogether which would mean nobody received special recognition. Just handle everything with a standard form contract. Here's a question. Why shouldn't siblings be able to "marry?" Okay, you may want to argue birth defects. How about gay siblings?

The hand-wringing arguments posted so far are about as compelling as those given to support anti-miscegenation laws ("God decreed the separation of the races!"

Actually God struck Miriam with leprosy for complaining about Moses' interracial marriage.

 

[familydog]

It has to be the line. Letting your kid play dress up or calling them a different name is one thing. Drugs, hormones and surgery on minors is child abuse. It's legally and morally wrong and repulsive. What adults do to their bodies is one thing, doing it to a minor is another. Minors can not consent to lifelong changes. This can not be normalized in the same way a relationship between adults has been.

Why not? The event horizon was crossed decades ago. Teens have been able to get abortions and birth control without parental consent since at least the 90s. State laws are already making it possible for teens to transition without parental consent. The normalization of tranny kids is the next logical step in our steep decline into leftism.

Tucker Carlson's second episode of Tucker on Twitter talks about this fairly succinctly.

 

[69360]

"Relationships" between same sex adults have not been normalized out here in the real world. Maybe in a few leftie cities and the odd costal Hamburg but everyday 'Murkin's don't accept weirdos, especially when said weirdos try to force others to behave as they wish. Apparently the Tee-Vee also promotes weirdo relationships? Once again that's not the real world either.

All recent polling says otherwise. A majority of Americans accept gay marriage. A majority of Americans do not accept trangender medical procedures, drugs or hormones on minors. This number has actually increased lately. It seems the left went too far and is getting pushback.

 

[69360]

Why not? The event horizon was crossed decades ago. Teens have been able to get abortions and birth control without parental consent since at least the 90s. State laws are already making it possible for teens to transition without parental consent. The normalization of tranny kids is the next logical step in our steep decline into leftism.

Tucker Carlson's second episode of Tucker on Twitter talks about this fairly succinctly.

It needs to be stopped. Children need to be protected.

 

[Swordsmyth]

All recent polling says otherwise. A majority of Americans accept gay marriage. A majority of Americans do not accept trangender medical procedures, drugs or hormones on minors. This number has actually increased lately. It seems the left went too far and is getting pushback.

Polls are a joke, any that support the agenda can be safely dismissed, it's been that way for at least a decade.

 

[familydog]

It needs to be stopped. Children need to be protected.

Of course. Do you think most people perpetrating these actions are doing so out of malice? Many think they are protecting children. Just as they felt they were protecting kids when they allowed them abortions and birth control without parental knowledge or consent.

The question isn't will children be protected or not. The question is whose definition of protection will be normalized?

 

[jmdrake]

Of course. Do you think most people perpetrating these actions are doing so out of malice? Many think they are protecting children. Just as they felt they were protecting kids when they allowed them abortions and birth control without parental knowledge or consent.

The question isn't will children be protected or not. The question is whose definition of protection will be normalized?

At the moment around the world the tide is turning against gender affirming care for minors.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news...ry-to-ditch-gender-affirming-care-guidelines/

Only in America is this seen as a partisan "transphobic" thing.

 

[Working Poor]

They were really some of the best neighbors I had. And they seem to have stuck together. Now, my religious views on the subject have not changed. But I take people as they are. What's going on now is agenda driven and is as dangerous to the lgbtq+ community as it is to conservative Christians

I am sure that my focus ought to be on discovering my on sin and to mind my own business when it comes to the sins of others. I have a right to defend myself from attack and say what I want to say. If someone asks me what I think about lgbtrst I say I am glad that I don't suffer from any of those afflictions and admit that I am still have issues too and that I want to work on those and pray for mercy for us . all. The law is the law and when we break them even if we don't believe them we will be judged.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

So.....if the states offered a pre-written agreement that could be signed and notarized that covered all of that, that wouldn't be enough because....? To have a state recognized "marriage" you have to fill out a piece of paper that, without having all the terms written on it, says all of that.

The written agreement is functionally equivalent to the marriage license + ceremony procedure that's used today. The problem is that the same people who want to deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples would want to deny them the contract because they don't want them to be treated the same as opposite-sex couples and feel that only opposite sex couple should be allowed to be referred to as "married". Some extremists would go even further and deny the term "married" to infertile opposite-sex couples.