![]() |
|
Register | FAQ | Donate | PW Store | PW Trivia | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
Civil Rights & Abortion Discuss The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage... at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by rivrrat A man can marry a woman, but a woman can't. A woman can marry a man, ... |
![]() |
|
Share | LinkBack (1) | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
||||
![]() Quote:
* * Quote:
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.” ~Abraham Lincoln |
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
The constitution of the United States of America does not at this time prohibit treating the sexes differently. But it does currently offer women something fairly close. |
|
||||
![]() WASHINGTON -- The equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does not protect against discrimination on the basis of gender or sexual orientation, according to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Scalia: Women Don't Have Constitutional Protection Against Discrimination |
|
||||
![]() See. But rest assured homosexuals will obtain all their rights before the sexes are considered deserving of equal rights- because men (all men) gain in equality before women do. That's just how history works.
|
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Continue that line of reasoning, Muffin... I'm judging you. Harshly. ![]() You get the respect you give. And if you're a Republican, you b*tch about paybacks being a b*tch. So sorry you're mad your guy is getting the respect you gave ours, Snowflakes.
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dabateman For This Useful Post: | ||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
And that is on top of the fact that the vast majority of states do not have “same sex union” recognition. Some state DOMAs even BAR recognition of same sex unions or similar benefits. * * Quote:
It does not prohibit (as in completely) treating the genders differently. But it does offer women something fairly close. * * Quote:
Did you read the REST of the article, which includes sections DIRECTLY REFUTING Scalia’s claims? * "In 1971, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that they were protected, in an opinion by the conservative then Chief Justice Warren Burger," Adam Cohen wrote in Time in September. "It is no small thing to talk about writing women out of equal protection -- or Jews, or Latinos or other groups who would lose their protection by the same logic. It is nice to think that legislatures would protect these minorities from oppression by the majority, but we have a very different country when the Constitution guarantees that it is so."Also Legal scholar Jack Balkin writes that while the 14th amendment doesn't end up explicitly mentioning sex, that doesn't mean it doesn't grant women equal protection:There are PLENTY of examples of the 14th amendment being applied to gender equality. ![]() * There is even an observed level of Equal Protection scrutiny (Intermediate scrutiny) applied to gender issues. Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.” ~Abraham Lincoln |
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
||||
![]() Does the US military treat women and men equally? No. Are they bound by the constitution to treat them equally. No.
The 14th amendment may be used to prohibit some forms of gender discrimination but it does not make gender discrimination constitutionally illegal the way an ERA would. |
The Following User Says Thank You to talloulou For This Useful Post: | ||
|
||||
![]() The military isn't really a good example at all.
Typical Governmental employment would fall under the existing Civil Rights Act. But the military is far from a typical case.* They have greater latitude to discriminate as appropriate to the mission. Another example would be handicap.* There are laws that prohibit discrimination based on handicap, but the military CLEARLY CAN discriminate based on handicap... * And on the second comment, we have no dispute. However, enacting an ERA would arguably not even*apply to*the issue of military treatment regarding gender. * But side-stepping that, what's the real gap?* ![]() What would the ERA cover that is currently not covered by the 14th amendment and its application to gender?
__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.” ~Abraham Lincoln |
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
It has become a fad of some folks to view the 14th Amendment as a 'blank check' sort of Amendment, by trying to make anything fit under the equal protection clause. So broad is such an approach that anything--literally any interpretation by which one claims some 'right'--could be spun as justified. It's almost as if the 14th has come to be considered by some a sort of constitution in and of itself (by 'priders, at least). No NEED for the rest, when one takes that sort of all-encompassing view of the 14th! To make the 14th fit gay marriage, it could be argued for anything, pretty much. It's the closest thing they've remotely been able to find to a gay-marriage amendment, and the fact they've had to co-opt a racism amendment in order to do that is pretty telling. To use the 14th in such a flippant, blank-check sort of way judicially is VERY dangerous precedent.
|
![]() |
Tags |
against, argument, dumbest, gay, marriage, the |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/civil-rights-abortion/22006-dumbest-argument-against-gay-marriage.html
|
||||
Posted By | For | Type | Date | |
Judicial Abuse of the Fourteenth Amendment: Abortion, Sexual Orientation & Gay Marriage Publius-Huldah's Blog | This thread | Refback | 01-20-2012 06:34 PM |