Steve Young's family up against Mormon church on Prop. 8

I was purposefully trying to avoid the "I'm not racist, I have black friends" kind of argument.

Since you asked, I had a friend in High School who was gay and I knew quite a few gay/lesbian folks while I was in the Navy, both service members and citizens of Iceland/Italy where I lived. I also currently work with a few people who are out, who knows how many that aren't. I would honestly classify them as working relationships and acquaintances more than close friends.

I thought it was worth asking simply to understand your point of view better. Now it makes a bit more sense.

amen, live and let live

I'm always perplexed when ballot measures like these (and for marijuana decriminalization) seem to fail. Especially in California.

David Frum, a conservative writer for National Review said that all you have to do is look at the demographics for those who find the gay issue so important -- it's overwhelmingly over the age of 40.

One day, the tide will turn.

The real argument here is not that anyone goes to jail but the denial of services available to heterosexuals to homosexuals based on the belief that the moral fabrics of our culture would be endangered if we did not.

You will note that this is the same argument used throughout history to oppress and discriminate against certain groups.

I'm always perplexed when ballot measures like these (and for marijuana decriminalization) seem to fail. Especially in California.

David Frum, a conservative writer for National Review said that all you have to do is look at the demographics for those who find the gay issue so important -- it's overwhelmingly over the age of 40.

One day, the tide will turn.

Here's hoping, Beemn.

I thought it was worth asking simply to understand your point of view better. Now it makes a bit more sense.

The real interesting question you should've asked is have I not had the chance to have any close friendships with gay individuals or have I made choices to specifically avoid that scenario. The answer is, I don't know. I get what you're saying, I've never had any true emotional/first hand investment in someone of this persuasion so how can I be sympathetic with their plight? It's not a question I haven't asked myself. But I still come back to my previously stated position.

The real argument here is not that anyone goes to jail but the denial of services available to heterosexuals to homosexuals based on the belief that the moral fabrics of our culture would be endangered if we did not.

You will note that this is the same argument used throughout history to oppress and discriminate against certain groups.

I won't lie, I can see why someone who is a member of one of those "certain groups," having experienced discrimination would be so averse to any preference denied a given demographic, almost regardless of reason. I hope I worded that well.

In honor of my 2,500th post, I'd like to say that I love everyone. Tons of love. Even animals, Beemn.

http://www.reggie.net/photos/ireland/sligo/carrowkeel/4737304_black_and_white_sheep-600.jpg

Saden:

You are absolutely right that the standard of review will usually dictate the outcome of a case involving an alleged violation of the Equal Protection Clause. In a nutshell, there are three standards of review: (1) strict scrutiny is applied to laws which discriminate on the basis of race or religion; (2) intermediate scrutiny is applied to laws which discriminate on the basis of gender; and (3) rational basis review is applied to most every other law which discriminates on some other basis. FYI - the above description isn't very comprehensive and people use different terms for the three levels of review.

By most accounts, laws prohibiting same sex marriage are subject to rational basis review, which is the least exacting standard of review. In order to find that legislation does not pass rational basis review, the court must find that the law cannot be supported by ANY conceivable justification. So, if it is at all conceivable that gay marriage could adversely affect society in ANY way, bans on gay marriage will survive rational basis review. Some courts have started to give rational basis review some teeth, but by and large rational basis review sets an exceedingly low bar.

In fairness to BleedBurgundy, he never said homosexuals to who try to get married should be tossed in jail and, as he pointed out, laws barring gay marriage do not criminalize attempts by homosexuals to get married. Instead, they deny same sex couples the right to have their unions recognized by the state and to have access to the rights associated with such recognition. BleedBurgundy is also entitled to his opinion that homosexuality is immoral. I personally think that point of view is rooted is fear and intolerance and is antiquated and Talibanesque, but to each his own.

BB:

Polls show that same sex marriage bans are going to go the way of T-Rex within the next few years. Whereas people over 40 tend to oppose gay marriage in overwhelming numbers, the opposite is true for people under 40. So, citing support for gay marriage bans is a bit of a double-edged sword.

I would also like to ask you why you think same sex couples should be barred from adopting kids. Keep in mind that thousands upon thousands of kids are waiting to be adopted and many of them will never have families to call their own. That you would prefer a kid to never having any family whatsoever in his/her entire life to having a same sex couple as parents is breathtaking in its heartlessness.

Finally, aside from saying that homosexuality is unnatural, you haven't advanced a single argument as to how same sex marriage is bad for society. People do a lot of things that are unnatural. We take medicines to alleviate sicknesses, we drive cars to avoid long walks and we fly in airplanes to travel across continents, but that doesn't make Advil, Ford and Northwest Airlines harbingers of the collapse of society. You can say it just "feels" wrong, but that doesn't really cut it. I can articulate many reasons why murder, robbery, rape, etc. are wrong. I can't really articulate why I like the color green. To me, the reasons you've expressed for thinking homosexuality is wrong sound a lot like my attempts to explain why I like the color green.

If only we enforced adultly laws (http://www.christianparty.net/adulterylaws.htm) we would have happier couples and less devoice in our culture. Got to love the Utah law. How far do you go? Where do you draw the line?

BleedBurgundy:

I hope you take this in good fun, but I think it's kind of funny that the guy with boobs in his signature is talking about how allowing homosexuals to commit to each other for life is against common "decency."