- 145
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2011
you seem to forget the fundamental part of majority rule is that they must protect minority rights. we dont live in a populist society. women's suffrage, abortion rights, civil right for african americans were all staked out to protect minority rights under majority rule. you are under the impression that law exists in some sort of vacuum outside of social conventions and that laws' purpose is to dictate some kind of agreed upon social good. laws are a reflection of society's social conventions to create a standard of both liberty and equality. to make gay marriage legal would only be to update the law to what the majority of the population already agrees upon and protect the rights and equality of a minority.Originally Posted by YG716
Missing the point. Make your argument else where I have done too much typing to explain again. reread it if you already read it. I already said to point out a reason that is not emotionally driven on why gay marriage needs to be legalized. Staking out ownership of sexuality??? Who does that serve besides yourself? In what way will the majority benefit from that??Originally Posted by culturecarnage
Originally Posted by YG716
Before you decide to be so sarcastic....
Read the entire thread before you decide to comment. Or at least go back a few pages.I have addressed the questions you asking.
you're making assumptions that i didn't read them and saying that you made valid points doesn't mean you did. its bigotry cut and dried, this idea that marriage is to be protected is out and out ridiculous as if the people who get married now somehow hold it in such high regard. quite frankly who gives a *$#% about what someone does that doesn't affect you in any way what so ever.
same goes for abortion, the only person who gets a right to say what i do with my vagina is me. point blank period. this ###!%#%@ of trying to legislate and determine moral behavior has got to stop. in telling me what i get to do with my vagina you're staking out some ownership of women as a whole an their reproductive rights. in denying gay marriage you're staking out ownership of sexuality. society is made p of people and people have no rights over other people. jay-z's parallel of gay mariage as a civil rights issue is hauntingly accurate.
Your vag is your vag and rightfully so and as you are a human being amongst a community of others you are more than welcome to do as you please with it . However this is legislation. Legislation is not made for self serving purposes, especially amongst a minority group. Ownership of sexuality? That why the government recognizes marriages and provides benefits to married couples? You cant be serious. Marriage is not about that to the government. I already explained this.
Legislation for gay marriage cannot be justified for any other reason than self serving purposes. What legislation gets passed that serves no point but to make a minority group happy especially when it takes a majority to pass it?? There's no discrimination here. Its fact that gay couples can not put people into this world. They offer nothing to anyone but themselves. Nobody's being unjust and oppressing anyone here. Legislation is set forth for the majority and has a beneficial purpose to the majority. That's why it gets passed. That's is why its called politics. Politics is whats popular amongst a majority.
your arguments tell me you know nothing about how society, law, legislature, and politics actually work. turn the tv off and open a book. read some legal history and social theory. i assure you, you'll be all the better for it.
lastly, for you to say that its an emotional argument is ridiculous as if in courtrooms and legislatures across the country if not the world don't make emotional arguments and as if somehow emotional arguments cannot be rational. it's absolutely ridiculous.