It doesnt deny any rights to any minority.
Marriage isnt a right, its a privilege.
English
-
No, it's a right. [url=http://writ.news.findlaw.com/grossman/20011120.html]Even high risk prisoners[/url] can get married.
-
Again, marriage is not a right. It says nowhere in the constitution or its amendments that marrying is a right secured and protected by the federal government. A privilege is dependent upon one meeting and agreeing to certain conditions, as marriage is.
-
Umm... I just posted an article containing details of a Supreme Court decision that said that marriage is a right than can't be denied even to high risk prisoners. I just proved that marriage is a right. You're right that the Constitution doesn't list marriage as a right, but it's been done by the courts. And of course, rights can also depend on meeting or agreeing to certain conditions.
-
Humans rights set by the UN includes the right to marry.
-
I dont remember electing any of our UN representatives so I dont not recognize the UN as a legitimate governing body.
-
Deal with it. Whether you see the UN as legitmate or not, it is, and they set the standard human rights which every person is entitled to, meaning that Marriage. Is. A. Right. They also give you rights such as your right to practice your religion freely and I bet you enjoy that right. Why can't lesbians and gays also enjoy their right to marriage?
-
which only a man and a woman should be allowed to take advantage of. it isn't about a supposed right to marry, it's about a right to equality.
-
The problem is there are still many many people, myself included, who believe in marriage as being one man and woman. We shouldnt just ignore this and allow the definition to change because it is thousands of years of tradition. I dont understand why they cant be happy calling it civil unions.
-
why not? why can't we change the definition of marriage? tradition is not a good reason to deny people equality. [quote]I dont understand why they cant be happy calling it civil unions[/quote]because it's segregation based on sexual preference which is wrong. if A = B then why do we need both A and B? if they're exactly the same in everything but name then why not just have A? it makes things much more simple and doesn't harm anybody except those who don't want to be associated with gay people which, quite frankly, is something they need to get over. if we had different names for marriage between black people and white people there would be an uproar, no? why is this so different?
-
[quote]I dont understand why they cant be happy calling it civil unions.[/quote]As Cultmeister said, inequality.
-
Because by federal definition, a civil union does not convey the same rights and privileges as a marriage. i.e., federal tax break for married couples.
-
Why should we deny them being married because of people who still believe in the older definition of marriage? I don't understand why you can't be happy with being treated different and with bigotry because of religion and history.
-
I can't have an argument with someone who automatically labels my values as bigotry. Good day.
-
I wasn't talking about your values, more so the people who treat ghey citizens as second class.
-
The right to life isn't a right, it's a privilege The right to practice religion freeling isn't a right, it's a privilege. Learn the human rights.