The unintended consequneces of gay marrige ballot wins?

Quote: AZDuffman

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

Massachusetts is hardly a "small" state, (ranked #14 in population) and they've let them gays marry for 8 years now. How long will it take before married gays destroy civilization? 20 years? 50 years? 100 years? Will AZDuffman even live long enough to see the consequences of a world of married lesbians? If the consequences don't occur in your lifetime, why worry?

I really hope that the Republican Party never "evolves" on this issue. I hope that the Republican Party will always be the party of traditional marriage forever and ever.

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?

Under my way of implementing it? Sure, I think it's workable. But as you may recall, I said that the government should be out of the marriage business, so they'd be applying for civil union status and it would be perfectly legal to deny them that if a member could not legally consent, i.e. the under age argument.

Quote: Ayecarumba

Redefining, "Marriage" also opens the door to, what we in the U.S. would generally consider, "underage" brides. Would you be okay with a 35 year old guy living with his 12 year old "wife" next door?

I'm not talking about redefining marriage, I'm talking about tossing it out as a legal concept. I don't see how my "civil unions for all" idea opens any such door because a key factor is consent.

Quote: reno

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?

It may take a lot longer than 12 years before any significant changes in culture/society could be quantifiable. I think it's reasonable to assume that gay couples have longed for official marriage status for as long as there have been gay couples, which I'd venture has been since the dawn of civilization. So comparing what's taken 1000's of years to accomplish in some places to what hasn't happened in 12 years doesn't seem like much of a comparison to me.

What there is no doubt about is that there are people longing to have their polygamous relationships state sanctified, and redefining marriage sets a precedent that they can leverage. How long will it take? Who knows? How long are the rest of us prepared to deny them equal status under the law?

Quote: Ayecarumba

Redefining, "Marriage" also opens the door to, what we in the U.S. would generally consider, "underage" brides. Would you be okay with a 35 year old guy living with his 12 year old "wife" next door?

Uh...better check the laws in that Marriage Mill town in Maryland. Age 13 there.

And as for re-defining marriage... that is pretty much what pre-nuptial agreements do.

Quote: rxwine

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 have heard of societies setting up marrige right after birth. They would wait to meet their spouse, but it was locked it that early.

I would not count on the courts to "do the right thing." From Dread Scott to Obamacare they have not, and they have not in who knows how many cases in between. Given that courts seem to not have a huge issue with letting a 12 year old get an abortion with no parental consent, letting them marry is no big stretch. Also no big stretch what with the "they are not bothering anybody" mentality about so-called gay marrige.

Quote: reno

How long will it take before married gays destroy civilization? 20 years? 50 years? 100 years? Will AZDuffman even live long enough to see the consequences of a world of married lesbians?

How can someone live until "never"?

Quote:

I really hope that the Republican Party never "evolves" on this issue. I hope that the Republican Party will always be the party of traditional marriage forever and ever.

They will. They have to, even. It will just take time.

But for now they're out fo excuses. first they argued against courts legislating from the bench, then against legislatures imposing legislation (odd, isn't it?). But now ballot initiatives duly voted for come out for same-sex marriage. No doubt some creative, rationalistic Republicans will find a way to twist a four-dimension pretzel arguing for court legislation from the bench against these referenda.

Fighting a losing but popular cause makes one a martyr. Fighting a losing but unpopular cause makes one an idiot. At least in politics. And politics are all about popularity.

In the meantime, don't lose sleep over their nightmares. I know I won't.

Quote: AZDuffman

I have heard of societies setting up marrige right after birth.

Common amongst Gypsies. Irish Travelers in the USA often have many arranged marriages at birth but run parades of tiny tots females in expensive off-the-shoulder evening gowns and performing stylized feminine mannerisms in gait and posture to auction off five and six year old girls. Two Irish Traveler groups in the US are thought to perform the marriages at 12 or 13 in a playground to marital bed transition. Societies seem to tolerate just about anything.

AZDuffman, do you think that legalizing gay marriage is a riskier experiment for society than legalizing marijuana?

I think the voters in Colorado & Washington did the right thing by legalizing marijuana, but I'll certainly admit that legal pot carries with it certain risks, the most obvious being an increase in car accidents due to more stoned drivers. The risks associated with gay marriage (polygamy) are a bit more far-fetched and unlikely.

Quote: reno

AZDuffman, do you think that legalizing gay marriage is a riskier experiment for society than legalizing marijuana?

I think the voters in Colorado & Washington did the right thing by legalizing marijuana, but I'll certainly admit that legal pot carries with it certain risks, the most obvious being an increase in car accidents due to more stoned drivers. The risks associated with gay marriage (polygamy) are a bit more far-fetched and unlikely.

I am very mixed on marijuana but mostly say make it a summary offense. Still not totally legal and legit but quit wasting time on it. Just a ticket for people who make themselves get caught.