Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > Civil Rights & Abortion
Register FAQDonate 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, ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack (1) Thread Tools Display Modes
  1 links from elsewhere to this Post. Click to view. #371 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 04:33 PM
talloulou's Avatar
Counselor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Western Washington
Gender: Female
Posts: 781
Thanks: 134
Thanked 391 Times in 246 Posts
Default Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
A man can marry a woman, but a woman can't.
A woman can marry a man, but a man can't.

No, they do not have the same rights.

When it comes to marriage, sexual orientation is completely irrelevant. The only thing relevant is gender.
While this is logical it only has impact if men and women have equal rights under the constitution. They do not. The Equal Rights Amendment was never ratified. While women have the right to vote there are still a large variety of incidences where it's completely constitutional to treat the sexes differently- with different rights.

It's highly likely that same sex marriage becomes a social norm before any ERA is added to the constitution. At least we don't have to register for the draft.
Reply With Quote
  #372 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 05:06 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,615
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,296 Times in 9,272 Posts
Post Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
While this is logical it only has impact if men and women have equal rights under the constitution. They do not. The Equal Rights Amendment was never ratified. While women have the right to vote there are still a large variety of incidences where it's completely constitutional to treat the sexes differently- with different rights.
The absence of the equal rights amendment does not mean that the constitution doesn’t protect people (under the 14th amendment) on gender issues.
*
*
Quote:
Originally Posted by talloulou
It's highly likely that same sex marriage becomes a social norm before any ERA is added to the constitution. At least we don't have to register for the draft.
To a greater extent, gender equality has already become protected under the 14th amendment making the ERA essentially moot.
__________________
“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
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #373 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 06:15 PM
talloulou's Avatar
Counselor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Western Washington
Gender: Female
Posts: 781
Thanks: 134
Thanked 391 Times in 246 Posts
Default Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
*

To a greater extent, gender equality has already become protected under the 14th amendment making the ERA essentially moot.
That's ridiculous. Athough not completely dissimilar to asserting homosexuals don't need same sex marriage because same sex unions are pretty much the same thing.

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.
Reply With Quote
  #374 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 06:23 PM
talloulou's Avatar
Counselor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Western Washington
Gender: Female
Posts: 781
Thanks: 134
Thanked 391 Times in 246 Posts
Default Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

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
Reply With Quote
  #375 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 06:25 PM
talloulou's Avatar
Counselor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Western Washington
Gender: Female
Posts: 781
Thanks: 134
Thanked 391 Times in 246 Posts
Default Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

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.
Reply With Quote
  #376 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 08:30 PM
dabateman's Avatar
Buckle-up Buttercup
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,121
Thanks: 2,113
Thanked 8,454 Times in 4,955 Posts
Default Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
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
Of course that is what Scalia says. He was in the minority opinion every time the court ruled that gender IS a protected class...
__________________
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.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dabateman For This Useful Post:
  #377 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 08:39 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,615
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,296 Times in 9,272 Posts
Post Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
That's ridiculous. Athough not completely dissimilar to asserting homosexuals don't need same sex* marriage because same sex unions are pretty much the same thing.
Such an allegation is like saying “separate but equal” schools establish that segregation does not need to end.
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:
Originally Posted by talloulou
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.
Isn’t that actually what I just said?
It does not prohibit (as in completely) treating the genders differently.
But it does offer women something fairly close.
*
*
Quote:
Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
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
Did you realize you were quoting from Huffington Post?
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."
In 1996, Scalia cast the sole vote in favor of allowing the Virginia Military Institute to continue denying women admission.
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:
First, The central purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment was to guarantee equal citizenship and equality before the law for all citizens and for all persons. It does not simply ban discrimination based on race. The fact that the word race is not mentioned in the text (as it is in the fifteenth amendment) was quite deliberate.
Scalia argues that the fourteenth amendment was not intended to prevent sex discrimination. That's not entirely true. The supporters of the fourteenth amendment did not think it would disturb the common law rules of coverture: under these rules women lost most of their common law rights upon marriage under the fiction that their legal identities were merged with their husbands. But these rules did not apply to single women. So in fact, the fourteenth amendment was intended to prohibit some forms of sex discrimination-- discrimination in basic civil rights against single women.

Moreover, the Constitution was subsequently amended. After the nineteenth amendment, the common law coverture rules made little sense. If married women had the right to vote, why did they not have the right to contract or own property in their own names? If we read the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of civil equality in light of the Nineteenth Amendment, the guarantee of sex equality should apply to both single and married women. The conservative court during the Lochner era thought as much in a case called Adkins v. Children's Hospital, decided immediately after the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment.
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
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #378 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 08:45 PM
talloulou's Avatar
Counselor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Western Washington
Gender: Female
Posts: 781
Thanks: 134
Thanked 391 Times in 246 Posts
Default Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

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.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to talloulou For This Useful Post:
  #379 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 09:06 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,615
Thanks: 10,112
Thanked 15,296 Times in 9,272 Posts
Post Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

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
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #380 (permalink)  
Old 11-11-2011, 10:18 PM
Joe Shoe's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,218
Thanks: 822
Thanked 1,589 Times in 1,079 Posts
Default Re: The Dumbest Argument Against Gay Marriage...

Quote:
Originally Posted by talloulou View 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.
Good point.
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.
Quote:
"Activist federal judges, on the other hand, see the 14th Amendment as a blank check to legalize whatever conduct they happen to approve of, such as abortion, homosexuality, & gay marriage." - Judicial Abuse of the Fourteenth Amendment: Abortion, Sexual Orientation & Gay Marriage Publius-Huldah's Blog
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
against, argument, dumbest, gay, marriage, the

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

LinkBacks (?)
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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0