The unintended consequneces of gay marrige ballot wins?

Quote: Ayecarumba

You mean India is not a "civilized" country? Check out Too Young To Wed. We, who are free, have an obligation to speak for the voiceless.

And again the legal argument. Once you say you will accept one differing definition of marriage you open yourself to being forced to accept them all, the point of the thread to start.

I mean, aren't you just denying the older guy and younger girl the right to marry who they want?

Quote: Ayecarumba

You mean India is not a "civilized" country?

If they allow such marriages, then yes, they are uncivilized in that sense.

But, really, if you're concerned about such things, then fight such things. They are worth fighting against. But they have nothing to do with whether consenting adults fo the same sex want to get married.

Quote: Nareed

If they allow such marriages, then yes, they are uncivilized in that sense.

But, really, if you're concerned about such things, then fight such things. They are worth fighting against. But they have nothing to do with whether consenting adults fo the same sex want to get married.

Why not? Who says marriage is supposed to be limited by age? Why deny people not of age he right to get married?

Quote: AZDuffman

The USA will soon have to recognize these marriages should the members of such immigrate. Given how a few judges have begun to consider sharia law in Muslim on Muslim court cases it is not a stretch to see Muslim communities in the USA wishing to have the practice here.

Ready for that?

Yep, I'm ready for that.

Quote: s2dbaker

Yep, I'm ready for that.

Kind of a suprise there. Doesn't how Muslims treat gays kind of make that contrary to your other views?

Quote: AZDuffman

Once you say you will accept one differing definition of marriage you open yourself to being forced to accept them all

Bush's speechwriter David Frum previously opposed gay marriage, but has changed his mind over the years. His views changed because Vermont has had legally recognized same sex unions since 2000, Massachusetts has had gay marriage on the books since 2004, and none of your predictions (polygamy, etc.) have occurred. If gay marriage were the boogeyman you're predicting it is, why haven't all of your superstitious fears come true in Vermont & Massachusetts? Isn't 12 years long enough for this dangerous experiment to have failed?

On the contrary, divorce rates are lower in states with gay marriage. According to provisional data from the Census Bureau and the Centers for Disease Control's National Vital Statistics System, 5 of the 10 states, plus the District of Columbia, with the lowest divorce rates per thousand people (of the 44 states, plus D.C., that had available data) are also among the nine jurisdictions (a group that includes eight states and the District of Columbia) that currently perform or recognize gay marriages.

Quote: AZDuffman

Kind of a suprise there. Doesn't how Muslims treat gays kind of make that contrary to your other views?

Your postulate appears to be that gays getting married leads to sharia law through the power of what exactly? Better make it good otherwise I go right back to mocking condescension.

Quote: reno

Bush's speechwriter David Frum previously opposed gay marriage, but has changed his mind over the years. His views changed because Vermont has had legally recognized same sex unions since 2000, Massachusetts has had gay marriage on the books since 2004, and none of your predictions (polygamy, etc.) have occurred. If gay marriage were the boogeyman you're predicting it is, why haven't all of your superstitious fears come true in Vermont & Massachusetts? Isn't 12 years long enough for this dangerous experiment to have failed?

On the contrary, divorce rates are lower in states with gay marriage. According to provisional data from the Census Bureau and the Centers for Disease Control's National Vital Statistics System, 5 of the 10 states, plus the District of Columbia, with the lowest divorce rates per thousand people (of the 44 states, plus D.C., that had available data) are also among the nine jurisdictions (a group that includes eight states and the District of Columbia) that currently perform or recognize gay marriages.

I repeat give it time. 12 years in one small state is no real test.

I read Saudi's have married girls as young as 8.

Here's where I think the law would go. Duffman argues the slippery slope marriage law might supercede other laws -- like our laws protecting 8 year olds from having sex with adult men (or women).

But I actually think a judge could rule in the interest of anti-pediphilia law over a marriage law in individual cases.

Judges rule that the health of a child overrides their own parents interest's when it puts the child in mortal danger, such as religious reasons avoiding medical care. I'm not sure why a judge might not rule in favor of some of our laws protecting young children. Of course, such cases might eventually be some sort of SCOTUS ruling at some point.

I should think if the problem is that grown men may want to marry young girls, the solution is to outlaw heterosexual marriage. Who knows what other perversions those straight people may try to justify next.