Same-Sex Marriage. "We should not even be in this debate." Ron Paul
Same sex marriage recently became legal in the state of Iowa due to run away, handpicked judges who have no knowledge of the Iowa Constitution and the law. Our elected officials are looking away, too timid to do their duty. Professor Herb Titus analyzes the Iowa Supreme Court same-gender marriage decision on this WHO podcast from today. For those who have an interest in this controversial issue, you MUST listen to this podcast. It is excellent. It took me 6 minutes to load.
http://www.whoradio.com/pages/pp_janmickelson.html
Four states now allow same sex marriage. Be warned that this issue will make its way to your state sooner than later. You should be taking action right now before this is FORCED onto your state by similar hand picked, lawless judges. Believe me, Iowa is proof that your elected officials will not listen to their constituents.
================
Update......
Of the 5 comments which I added, and my original post, the word judge or judicial branch was included no less than 22 times. The intention of this post was to discuss judicial tyranny. Apparently the term "same sex marriage" is some kind of trigger or hot button for people.
For my part, I believe I could have gone about this differently. Anisha's post and follow up comment is proof of that. http://www.dailypaul.com/node/83075#comment-906572 But not even Anisha's post has remained on topic.
If I were to have entitled this post, "Judges Gone Wild- Coming Real Soon to Your State," could we have kept the focus on the judicial aspect? Or if I had written "Guns Banned - Coming Real Soon to Your State," could we have debated how judges are writing the law?
Somehow I doubt it. Except for a couple of comments about Republic vs. Democracy with regard to rights of minorities, and a comment from spacehabits, this thread morphed into a discussion on the human sexual condition.
But the comment that bothered me the most was the comment that challenged my decision to post this on a "libertarian web site." If that is the case, then perhaps the Daily Paul has outlived its title and should be called the Daily Libertarian.
At least Ron Paul was able to stay on topic and not be distracted or hijacked into discussing "who's a homophobe and who is not."
From Ron Paul's statement, "Resisting Judicial Tyranny"......
"The Founders never intended for a handful of unelected, unaccountable federal judges to decide social policy for the entire nation. Just as Texas is not required to recognize medical licenses, law licenses, or driving licenses from other states, it ought not be forced to recognize gay marriage licenses granted elsewhere. Already some same-sex couples have sued in federal court to force the nationwide recognition of their marriages, so the Marriage Protection Act is needed to preserve states’ rights. Federal judges have flouted the will of the American people for too long, acting as imperial legislators instead of jurists."
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=367
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=593
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=590
http://www.ronpaullibrary.org/document.php?id=995
Let's face it, even libertarians are what they often accuse others of, guilty of changing the focus of what the topic is for their own agenda. I appreciate all the comments though, even if we didn't come to addressing the judicial aspect.
=======
"We should not even be in this debate." Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkpdzJd0CaM
Let this thread fade away.
Homewreckers
I think we should debate all the women having sex with married men.
When men cheat, with whom do they cheat?
I love this website.
and I'm gonna marry it.
somedays, I think I already am...
The debate should be about state sactioned marriage ...
Why do we need a liscence from the state to get married?
Why do we need a state blood test in some states to get married?
If a state wants to regulate marriage and define marriage or redefine marriage, then go ahead.
If the Catholic Church has a problem with this new definition then they should either live with it or decide to call their unions by another name. I know what marriage means to me and that is all that matters. And when people meet my wife and I, they clearly know what marriage means to us.
For the record ...
When we were married in the church, there were no state papers filed by us. If there was any filing done, it was by the church.
This whole arguement or at least the points that the powers that be wish to argue seems pointless to me.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
I believe Ron Paul said "we
I believe Ron Paul said "we should not even be in this debate" when he was running for president. i.e. the federal government should not have anything to do with it. It is however a very important matter. I prefer to let the sex perverts be dealt with by the vice squad.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
well
Fortune Favors the Bold
you'll be glad to know I keep my sex biblical, I have my girlfriend dress up as the virgin mary:)
Fortune Favors the Bold
wow
take your pointy white hood off when you post here please!
“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” Plato
“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” Plato
The vice squad should have
The vice squad should have white hoods on ?lol you use the persecution complex the same way the mexicans who want amnesty do. call everyone who does not agree with them racists. it only works on cowards and the ignorant.
its not just same sex marriage thats illegal in the majority of the states just being a single sex pervert is also illegal. do you want to decriminalize child molestation too? seriously. bestiality . necrophilia. what other perversions should be allowed in the marriage mix in the interest of 'freedom' of course?
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
I
Fortune Favors the Bold
think the reason people are reacting to this thread is that many of us do not come from the perspective of Christian conservatives. I, myself, am an anarchist. I favor all sexual freedom, don't have a problem with illegal immigrants, don't believe america is a christian nation, etc.
I try not to get into disagreements about these topics because it's ultimately pointless. I have no basis to argue with someone whose convictions are based on faith. I understand the difference between privileges for groups and freedom for all. I would say, as it exists, marriage is a government privelege for heterosexual couples. As a single person, I believe people have the right to contract freely, and that the government's only role in the matter should be to enforce contracts.
Hopefully, we can agree to separate matters of personal faith from the rule of law.
Fortune Favors the Bold
I do not wish to pick a fight but it seems that ...
your definition of marriage has no historical precedence.
But like I said above, if a state wishes to redefine it, then so be it.
Just be more clear about who is redefining what.
I say, if a church disagrees with the new definition then pick a new word for their unions.
And if the state redefines that word then pick another.
If a gay couple wants to be a couple and wants to receive all the state mandated priveledges placed on such an entity, then so be it. Go for it.
Their relationship is neither better or worse than the relationship I have with my wife, but it is quite different. Can you acknowledge that?
And for that matter, our neighbor's heterosexual marriage is also quite different than ours.
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994
well
Fortune Favors the Bold
you have to do through the nuts and bolts of the priveleges one by one, but I think all that could be dealt with through a contract, as far as the state is concerned. Anything else related to a notion of marriage could be dealt with by the individuals themselves.
Fortune Favors the Bold
¡LECHE LIBRE!
¡LECHE LIBRE!
Marriage: The Unholy Alliance of Chruch and State
“By the power vested in me, by the state of California, I now pronounce you Husband and Wife.” declared the minister in front of the altar of God.
We have heard it so many times at weddings, movies and television that we forget
the significance of this pronouncement and how it blurs the vast difference between the government meaning of marriage and the popular meaning of marriage.
The word “marriage” conjures in our minds and emotion the promise of love, caring, committed relationship, living together, making babies, families, and continuity. A government marriage license does not require or address any of those things. The couple does not even have to declare that they intend to like each other or live together. In this respect it is a hollow document, only a voucher for a bundle for exclusive government benefits and privileges. These subsidies have grown with little thought, challenge or debate during the 20th century.
There is a popular misconception that marriage in the eyes of the government is a contract between the bride and the groom. This is not quite true, “Though mutual assent is necessary to enter into a marriage, the marriage itself is a status or relationship rather than a contract, the rights and obligations of the parties thereto being fixed by the law instead of by the parties themselves” There are three parties: The bride, the groom and the government. The bride and groom merely agree (assent) to be governed by the government’s rules. The government reserves the exclusive right to itself to change the rules at anytime. No one reads the unsuspecting couple their “Miranda rights” or informs them about what they are agreeing to.
Our minister conducting the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony is a government official, an “agent” of the State of California. There is a conspiracy of Church and State. If a couple wishes to have the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony in their own local church they will be forced, as a practical matter, to get a government marriage license in which they assent to this contract with government which binds them to whatever marriage laws the government wishes to enact or change.
The controversy over same-sex marriage should cause us to ask: Why is the government involved in marriage? Equality? Fairness? Why is the government giving exclusive financial benefits to people with marriage licenses and not to people without marriage licenses? I submit that people will fall in love, live together, make babies and perpetuate families with or without the government. Why do we want the ministers of our faith to be government agents?
I recommend that churches stop being agents of the government; that the state governments stop issuing marriage licenses; and that the federal government stop giving exclusive subsidies to people with marriage licenses. Benefits for all or benefits for none.
The elements of “government marriage” are the exclusive financial benefits, the exclusive privileges, and the legal responsibilities of the husband and wife. We can imagine that the financial benefits were originally motivated by concern over the “little woman” staying at home raising the children with no career, and not having any Social Security. That concern is not so applicable in recent years and makes even less sense for same-sex marriage. The exclusive privileges such as hospital visitation and exemption for testifying against a spouse could be made available in some form to all people, single or married. The legal responsibilities, in any case married or not, are better managed by explicit documents such as wills, durable power of attorney, living wills and partnership agreements.
The arguments against getting government out of the marriage and special civil union business break down into convenience; singles can get married if they want government benefits; and that single people don’t need the benefits. Pretty weak arguments compared to the passion generated in the recent marriage debates.
Btw...
Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire are THREE states (half the states) where marriage equality passed by LEGISLATIVE vote. Not activist courts. In Connecticut both houses confirmed marriage equality and signed by the Governor after the courts ruled. In Massachusetts both houses overwhelmingly defeated an initiative to overturn by constitutional amendment.
It is quite clear to me the worst elements of the Freedom movement are available through this site. Rather than hearing from the 18-24 demographic which is 2/3 pro gay MARRIAGE and pro gays being equal with straight we are hearing from the bullshit demographic that believes "gays should be acknowledged because we don't want the government to acknowledge marriage at all."
Every gay person knows this is nothing short of a COPOUT by the conservative elements of Ron Paul's base to keep gays from getting married but using a bullshit excuse to evade it. We all know government will NEVER get out of the marriage issue but rather than expanding it to be equal we rather keep it narrow in the SLIM hopes that government will one day get out of marriage in hundreds of years.
Gay people do not care if churches or anyone else acknowledge their MARRIAGE. They just want the dignity of a free society and equal recognition under the law and want to get on with their f**king lives.
I am disgusted!
As a pro-gay libertarian who supports Ron Paul and who has HUNDREDS of gay friends who support Ron Paul I find this post DISGUSTING and horrendous...
After the GOP used us in 2004 as a pawn to win elections, and the Democrats ignored us... we were hoping to find a pro-FREEDOM movement that would celebrate our rights to be married and live as free citizens.
Instead, the bile and hatred shown on this post is reminiscent of the extremist Nazi attitude in many Southern States during the Jim Crow era.
The Freedom Movement should be EMBRACING same-sex marriage rather than painting us as a threat to society! It is quite clear this website does NOT support freedom for all except for white homophobes living in rural areas who want the freedom to gay bash.
I am so disgusted that a Ron Paul FREEDOM website would dare call to arms a movement against freedom for gays and lesbians.
It is no wonder you people are in the 5% extremity. I will start my own REAL FREEDOM movement for libertarians who are pro- free market and pro- peace and PRO GAY. So to hell with this website.
By the way, Ron Paul's campaign manager was gay and I wonder how he would feel about this bile filled posting if he were still alive.
Captain Freedom,I am a
Captain Freedom,
I am a Christian, and consider gay marriage a sin. However, as long as you respect my privacy and do not shove it down my throat, I will repsect your right to privacy and you do whatever you want to do with your life. There is one condition though, if you are my neighbor, you will have to share your beer with me when I run out, and vice versa LOL
"The price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance"- Thomas Jefferson
There is no Left or Right -- there is only freedom or tyranny. Everything else is an illusion, an obfuscation to keep you confused and silent as the world burns around you." - Philip Brennan
"Invest only in things that you can stand in front of and pr
Give me a break! Freedom
Give me a break! Freedom has nothing to do with everyone agreeing we each other. If gays really wanted freedom they would be saying the same thing Ron Paul did, marriage is a function of the church not the state. What makes our gov't think it can say who can and cannot get married?
I have a natural normal
I have a natural normal disgust for sex perverts who spew bile and hatred and other emotion stirring words in order to muddy the water.
"The Freedom Movement should be EMBRACING same-sex marriage rather than painting us as a threat to society!" what percentage of child molesters are in the 3% queer minority, heterophobe?
You sissies are disgusted about something every minute of your lives. want to stop feeling disgusted stop living under a rock
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
I am on your side
Please don't turn away from all of us because of the ignorance of some. I don't get why people even give it a thought. Must be some kind of personal problem. I am always happy to see two people in love commit to each other and share thier lives together. How can that hurt anyone else? Why do people want to make personal decisions for others that don't affect them? Down right retarded.
Truth is, this is not about
Truth is, this is not about "getting the government out of marriage" as many of these people preach. These people stood loud and tall in support of banning gay marriage. They supported DOMA. Many of them stood out of the way on Prop 8 and let it pass. Talk about HYPOCRISY! They are going against the very principles they preached.
The very fact we must hear people preaching against our rights to be happy as people in a FREEDOM forum shows how lost and desolate this movement has become.
What happened to the anti-family values mantra preached by Penn & Teller that condemned the tyrannical Christians who shoved their agenda down our throats? What happened to the message of people like Harvey Milk who stood up for freedom from Tyranny of the Majority (which is exactly what Prop 8 is). He was a Republican!!! He supported Barry Goldwater. What happened? The GOP was taken over by the Christian Race Federation and he became a Democrat.
The Freedom Movement should be embracing gay rights at a time when nobody else has. Had they done this, they would have won over millions of Americans dissatisfied with the "not in my state" attitude of people like the A-hole who wrote this article. The fact they talk about us like we're a threat shows that they are not worth the time of day!
We need a better, newer freedom movement. One that embraces REAL freedom like same-sex marriage equality. Free market economics. Abortion. Immigration. Free trade. and all the other freedoms this pathetic movement has ignored.
THE STATE WILL NEVER GET OUT OF MARRIAGE AND UNTIL IT DOES THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE REASON TO DENY OR GET IN THE WAY OF EQUAL MARRIAGE FOR GAYS!
Don't Ask ... Don't Tell ...
... just listen up to ...
an on point summing up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ymoUF-iGNE&feature=rec-HM-r2
........................ how freedom sounds.
there is a serious lack of culture
going on within this movement. it's no wonder that kid said that to noam chomsky. every single bible argument in this thread has been an attempt of the ego to prove your imaginary righteousness. you might as well have been quoting bob dole.
i've probably met more lgbt and supporters of lgbt in my life who are christian who have a better understanding of christianity and it's history
than straight individuals of the same religion puking late 1970's propaganda.
what
Fortune Favors the Bold
comments to noam chomsky are you reffering to?
Fortune Favors the Bold
Christian Sabotage
"What you should say to outsiders is that a Christian has neither more nor less rights in our Association than an atheist. When our platform becomes too narrow for people of all creeds and of no creeds, I myself shall not stand upon it." ~ Susan B. Anthony
I've really had enough of this whacked out religious crap being shoved down my throat on a political 'freedom' blog. I respect people of every religion, but when no respect is afforded to me, when I'm told that I'm a sinner, fornicator (guilty), pariah, and that I must 'repent or burn', I can't work with you people.
We agree on nearly 100% of everything else. But if you're looking to make this movement ideologically pure by excluding people like myself, then you are sabotaging the potential to grow this movement beyond the 5% we won nationally in the last primary election. Is that your goal?
A big tent philosophy won Ronald Reagan the presidency. A small tent philosophy that excludes gays and lesbians is going to get us nowhere.
I'm not asking that you change your beliefs, but I am asking that you keep your dripping arrogance and moral superiority to your homes and churches. It has no place in civil society.
"An honest god is the noblest work of man. ... God has always resembled his creators. He hated and loved what they hated and loved and he was invariably found on the side of those in power."
~ Robert G. Ingersoll
"I'm not asking that you
"I'm not asking that you change your beliefs, but I am asking that you keep your dripping arrogance and moral superiority to your homes and churches. It has no place in civil society."
Religion has no place in civil society? Ever heard of freedom of religion? keep your arrogance and immorality in the closet.
"We must re-take the Republican Party"-Ron Paul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlqXq8YxQFQ
IDK if you know about this,
IDK if you know about this, but there is something called "free speech", so rather you like it or not Scott is free to quote the Bible just as you can quote susan.
Really?
Gosh, I didn't know that. I've only read the whole constitution dozens of times. But yes, there it is ~ Amendment One!
Yes, Scott and the other bible-thumpers are free to spout all the hate and drivel that they want, just like I'm free to smack it down with a vengeance. My only point is that it's in the best interests of the Freedom Movement if they voluntarily refrain from all the divisive & bigoted nonsense while we try to grow this movement into something other than a helpless minority.
"Words have the power to both destroy and heal. When words are both true and kind, they can change our world."
~ The Buddha
A WORD FOR GODWACKER
"He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still."
Revelation 22:11
King James Bible
A word for Scott the Closet Case
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution." ~ James Madison
Kick that closet door open honey, the air is fresh outside!
Thats just the point, if you
Thats just the point, if you don't broadcast it all over, people will leave you alone. If you are ok with your lifestyle, why do you feel the need to keep trying to win approval from others by telling everyone else about it-I can't speak for everyone else here, but personally I really don't care what you with your own sex life, it just seems you keep on and on about your sex life like it should be on the front page news for everyone else. Well buddy, I hate to tell you this, but for some of us, we have a whole lot more to think about than sex right now. I honestly cannot see why sex should even need to be discussed period, but I guess for some folks its all they can think about day and night.
I could say the same thing about your bigotry
"If you don't broadcast it all over, people will leave you alone."
I couldn't care less whether you approve of my lifestyle or not. What I care about is equality under the law. If I had it, I wouldn't have anything to say on the matter.
You're the ones talking about denying rights based on sexuality. It's you who is saying that I'm not equal under the law and that I don't deserve equality. It's you that is obsessing on my private life.
You are the ones causing this controversy by demonizing me with your fire and brimstone crap.
Pack it in. A poll today showed national approval for gay marriage now at 49%. That number is going up ~ fast! You've already lost this battle. Either accept that equality under the law is coming or get left in the dustbin of history with the rest of the sad bigots.