It seems that New Hampshire has jumped on the Gay Marriage bandwagon. Just like many other states that passed "Man & Woman" marriage laws. Also, like many of those states, the Supreme Couurt nullified the law and put in their own law allowing gay marriage. The reason they use to justify their actions is that the "Man & Woman"* marriage law was unconstitutional. I would like to quickly address three of these issues:
- Unconstitutional - There is nothing in any of these states constitutions about marriage. That is why the law was originally put on the ballot. So the only justification they have for their judgement is that since it is not in there it is not constitutional. Really, that's it. My speeding tickets, sales tax and not eating ice cream on Sundays are also unconstitutional. Hey, we should challenge the speeding laws!
- Civil Rights - The underlying defense the court justices also cite is that civil rights are at stake. We are all born with things that we have no conrtol over and there should be civil rights to protect these attributes. For example:
- Brain - We're born with it and everyone's brain is unique. Consequently we will all have different ideas and opinions. The first amendment protects this as well as portions of other amendments.
- Body - We have a body and it should be protected. There are many civil rights that touch on this including the Fourth Amendment, anti-abortion laws, the 13th Amendment & 18th Amendment.
- Progeny - We reproduce, awesome! There are many of laws that protect this.
- New Law - This is what I find most offensive. Not only are these supreme courts going against the will of the people, but they are making new laws. Wouldn't that be nice if we could just get a committee and have them just give us all our laws? No, that would be a oligarchy which is also similar to a dictatorship, sovereignty or communism. That is exactly what we were rebelling against when we founded this country.
So I fully disagree with these rulings, but hopefully they piss off their public enough to do the right thing and vote in a constitutional amendment. Then it will be constitutional.
Be legal.
* I know that I've left two things hanging here. I will discuss "Why marriage?" and "Choice Attraction" at a later date.
Evan, did you read the court's decision? Deciding whether or not something is constitutional is, as I am sure you know, a complicated businesses, and it would be interesting to see you actually adress what the court specifically had to say on the matter, rather than just the general conclusion of "unconstitutional".
ReplyDeleteI would also point out that as of now NH has legalized same sex marriage not just because of the judges but because of the governing body.. ie. the house and senate. Does that change any of your arguments?
ReplyDeleteAnd... I think the words "civil rights" and infallible rights get confused sometimes. What are civil rights? you say that civil rights should protect us in regards to things we are born with and have no control over, right? I know you have the (rather mistaken) idea that gay people aren't born gay, but I wonder about your second point regarding body. Wouldn't anti abortion laws actually be harmful to the body? It is my body... by your definition I should be able to control my own progeny right? Then shouldn't I be able to to have the right to decide when and where and how often I will reproduce?
"it would be interesting to see you actually adress what the court specifically had to say on the matter"
ReplyDeleteI agree. This will have to be fodder for another post. Thank you.
"I know you have the (rather mistaken) idea that gay people aren't born gay"
I love this argument. Especially from the skeptical community. Every single study I've seen from the "born gay" camp that prooves their point has either been debunked or proves the opposite. The more I hear from science on this subject the more resolute in my stance I become. Science supports the idea that sexual attaction is ultimately a choice, influenced by many factors yes, but still a choice. No one is born gay, heterosexual, bisexual or otherwise.
"by your definition I should be able to control my own progeny right? Then shouldn't I be able to to have the right to decide when and where and how often I will reproduce?"
First off, it is not your body you might want to abort or control (ie. child protection laws). Secondly it is your choice on when you should reproduce, but risks come with this activity. Thirdly (mostly because I like to say thirdly) it takes two to reproduce and it should take two to decide what happens from the resulting life, accidental or otherwise.