Massachusetts Court rules state cannot ban gay marraige

[Rufus T. Firefly]

But, again, rights and benefits are different things, and this is about the former, not the latter.

[MrFun]

An earlier generation used to believe that interracial marriages were immoral, and that society needed to be "protected" through laws of morailty to prevent interracial marriages.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But, again, rights and benefits are different things, and this is about the former, not the latter

It ain't such a clear cut line, IMO.

[orange]

step in the right direction!

[mrmitchell]

Yesterday, Hawaii.
Today, Massachusetts.

...Tomorrow, the world!!!!!!11

[Ben Kenobi]

Besides cases where someone is infertile, what about cases where the couple getting married make a deliberate decision not to have any kids before they get married? (Why this is unusual it does happen.) Should we quiz people about their intentions regarding kids before they get married, or should we make them sign a contract requiring a certain number if they do so

Hence my clarifier, on the whole marriage has substantial benefits for society. Individual examples may differ, but the entire sample works out to be enormously positive.

So try again, Mordoch.

[Ben Kenobi]

LORIZAEL

So, why should a gay couple that adopts a child not get economic benefits from their union, while a straight couple that decides not to have children get economic benefits from their union?

Excellent point. However, to address such change, all we would need to do is compensate all those who are willing to adopt children. No need to change the marriage laws.

We don't actually need more children. There are too many people as it is...

Look at the demographics. Without immigration, we would be lamenting the population decline and the resultant drop in the consumer base.

[Ben Kenobi]

It's called in vitero fertization or even just hetero sex.

Che:

On the whole, is this something we see with gay unions? No. This is the exception.

[Verto]

Originally posted by Spec
Who really cares if gay people get married? It is not up to us but up to them to decide. This should not be a court case but a go right ahead case.
It's not like a marriage between brothers and sisters kinda stuff....
Spec.

So, it's not up to us if two gay consenting adults wish to marry, but two consenting adults who happen to be related cannot marry? Even if they never had children?

[Ben Kenobi]

Mr. Fun:

Ignoring your unnecessary diatribe,

Children can grow up to be outstanding individuals regardless of the marital status of their heterosexual/homosexual parents.

And notice, I do not reject this preposition. All I say is that children who grow up with two parents, a mom and a dad generally do better than those who don't. Again, looking at the sample as a whole, rather than individual examples.

Funny how many different angles of attack all come from similar misinterpretations.

[Ben Kenobi]

The issue isn't benefits; it's freedom of association and equal rights to enter into contracts based on sex.

Up through the late 1960s, Virginia and other states banned interracial marriages, until SCOTUS ruled such bans unconstitutional (in Loving vs. Virginia, IIRC). The logic was that marriage is a contract as far as the State is concerned; to tell a man that he can enter into a contract with a white woman but not a black woman is discrimination based on race. So, similarly, to tell a man he can enter into a contract with women, but not men, is discrimination based on sex.

Rufus:

This is a better argument, however, your first point is the weakest. How many times do we hear the argument that gays are being denied benefits? They want the benefits and social recognition of marriage more so than anything else. To seperate the legal status from benefits has no merit.

Now, as for your analogy to Loving and Virginia, you base your reasoning on equality. There is no situation where having a black man ought to differ from a white man. The same is not true for sex.

For example, would you want a man counseling a raped woman? No. But is this not discrimination based on sex?

Marriage is one of these examples, where it is in the interests of society to limit the contract to members of the opposite sex, in that the man can only make a contract with a woman.

it's freedom of association

Nope. You are making a contract with the STATE, as well as with each other. Read your own argument so you see why freedom of association does not come into play.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Hence my clarifier, on the whole marriage has substantial benefits for society. Individual examples may differ, but the entire sample works out to be enormously positive.

So try again, Mordoch.

But how can you justify allowing individuals who are both 70 or older to marry given your justification? They are actually less likely to have or adopt kids than a younger homosexual couple. I also fail to see why you don't have fertility requirement for marriage if the specific issue you previously mentioned is your primary concern. Furthermore I question your population argument. While there are economic benefits for a population increase in the US, they are outweighed by the quality of life issues. If increasing the birth rate is your goal, giving huge tax breaks to those who have kids is much more efficient than you idea of restrictions on marriage.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi All I say is that children who grow up with two parents, a mom and a dad generally do better than those who don't. Again, looking at the sample as a whole, rather than individual examples.

The big issue I see with the argument is the following. There certainly have been studies showing how coming from a two parent home is beneficial, but that does not establish that you need the two parent household to consist of a man and a woman.

You need a comprehensive study examining children who were raised in households with a man and a woman in comparision to those raised in households with two parents of the same sex. Without such as study, any assumptions in this area are merely guesses. For all you know, the study might conclude that kids are better off being raised in two parent homosexual households.

[KrazyHorse]

That "childbirth" argument has been completely demolished in previous debates on the subject.

You've got a real bug up yo' ass, don't you Ben? I like how you claimed that the kids in your Xian groupare subject to danger if they express their faith publically...

[Wittlich]

Massachusetts Court rules state cannot ban gay marraige

Well, I must say that this is GOOD NEWS indeed!

I don't want to get further involved into this conversation, because I know it will only end up in a pissing contest...