Marriage discrimination struck down in Arkansas.

[Jackalope]

You know, Heywood, for someone who claims to be ambivalent about marriage equality, you sure spend a hell of a lot of time arguing against it.

One can only speculate why.

I like the debate. Good arguments teaches you to think about and defend your position.

If you say so. My observation is that getting you to commit to a position is a bit like nailing Jello to the wall. Just sayin'.

[Heywood]

If the government stayed out of marriage then ssm would be legal in every state.

Effectively yes....this whole debate exists because of government meddling where it shouldn't.

[Losty]

Yeah, and no one is denying gays the right to marry. They can marry someone of the opposite sex just like anyone else.

That is a piss poor argument, and you know it. It was probably the same precise nonsensical argument used when interracial marriage was illegal.

Oh, you're a white man who wants to marry the black woman whom you love? Sorry, but you can still marry a white woman.

It is exactly the same nonsensical argument that was used.

[Heywood]

I like the debate. Good arguments teaches you to think about and defend your position.

If you say so. My observation is that getting you to commit to a position is a bit like nailing Jello to the wall. Just sayin'.

I have several positions.

1. Government should not meddle with marriage.
2. Judges shouldn't make stuff up(i.e. "there is no rational reason" or "pursuit of happiness" refers to marriage).
3. Absent God, there is no reason to think heterosexual unions and homosexual unions offer equivalent value to society.
4. It is okay to pretend homosexual unions and heterosexual unions offer equivalent value to society.
5. If you want to pretend homosexual unions and heterosexual offer equivalent value to society...don't force the next guy to pretend with you.

[Silver]

2. Judges shouldn't make stuff up(i.e. "there is no rational reason" or "pursuit of happiness" refers to marriage).
3. Absent God, there is no reason to think heterosexual unions and homosexual unions offer equivalent value to society.
4. It is okay to pretend homosexual unions and heterosexual unions offer equivalent value to society.
5. If you want to pretend homosexual unions and heterosexual offer equivalent value to society...don't force the next guy to pretend with you.

The only one pretending is you.

[Chas]

And again I say, baking and photography are not fundamental rights. It is not comparable.

This whole we aren't discriminating against homosexuals because we are outlawing everyone from ssm not just homosexuals has already been tried in Lovings V. Virginia except they said they weren't violating equal protections bc they were banning all people from marrying interracially not just black people. It was shot down by the US Supreme Court then and it should be shot down again now.

Baking and photography are basic rights under the ninth amendment....remember...pursuit of happiness...it means anything your want it to mean.

A judge could easily rule that a bakers pursuit of happiness is sufficient cause for him to refuse to serve gay weddings.

"Pursuit of happiness" does not appear in the Ninth Amendment or anywhere else in the Constitution.

---

If the government stayed out of marriage then ssm would be legal in every state.

Effectively yes....this whole debate exists because of government meddling where it shouldn't.

Marriage has always been a legal issue; government has always been involved.

[Heywood]

Baking and photography are basic rights under the ninth amendment....remember...pursuit of happiness...it means anything your want it to mean.

A judge could easily rule that a bakers pursuit of happiness is sufficient cause for him to refuse to serve gay weddings.

"Pursuit of happiness" does not appear in the Ninth Amendment or anywhere else in the Constitution.

My bad, I got confused because I relied on a SteelCurtain post which I didn't read carefully. I thought he claimed "pursuit of happiness" was in the 9th amendment and just accepted that as true(been a long time since I studied the Constitution). He did not make that claim.

[Jackalope]

If the government stayed out of marriage then ssm would be legal in every state.

Effectively yes....this whole debate exists because of government meddling where it shouldn't.

Perhaps - but the reality of the situation is that in this country, marriage is very much a matter of civil law - and as long as that is the case, it is the duty of the government to ensure that all persons have equal treatment under the law.

[Ryantology]

Yeah, and no one is denying gays the right to marry. They can marry someone of the opposite sex just like anyone else. If they don't want to marry someone of the opposite sex, they are free to choose not to marry at all.....just like to photographer is free to choose not to be a photographer.

Unlike in the discriminating baker's case, nobody is harmed by the decision of two adults to consent to join in marriage. I know you probably thought that was a clever rejoinder, but it was actually just a false equivocation.

I am the minority being demonized by the majority. That's okay...I don't have to be here if I don't want to be.

You would think being a 'demonized minority' would help you empathize with the actual demonized minorities at the heart of this discussion.

[Esquilax]

We can talk about the baker who is forced to bake for gay weddings or the photographer who is forced to shoot pictures at gay weddings...no ninth amendment for them. It seems "pursuit of happiness" only means what the reader or a judge wants it to means....in otherwords....as a guiding doctrine its so ambiguous that it is meaningless.

Are you also objecting to the fact that bakers are forced to obey food safety standards, or that photographers are forced to use film in their cameras when they attend events, and not just pocket the money and flee? Or do you recognize that we need legally protected standards of conduct to stop the unscrupulous from harming the consumer?

Because all this argument of yours is, is special pleading in order to advantage discrimination. Truthfully, you have no problem with bakers and photographers, and anyone else, being forced to do certain things in their professional life, just so long as that doesn't conflict with what's either an internalized bigotry, or the biggest stick up your ass that I've ever seen.