Well.. the way I think it SHOULD be is that gay marriage is not outlawed, and each church can decide whether they will marry gay couples. The churches should not be forced to marry people, and they should not be able to be sued because once again, I believe in a separation of church and state. If the churches want to discriminate against people they can -- it's their business. However, the government should stay out of it and should remain neutral. The gay couples can then get married in a different church, in a different state, at a temple or at a neutral locale. Their marriage would be recognized by the state.

(Well, that's what I think would have the best chance of working. What I *really* think should happen is that gay couples are given all of the same rights as straight couples and interracial couples. Gays can get married anywhere straight/interracial marriages would be able to, and should be given the same respect as straight/interracial marriages should. Religious beliefs have zero place in government, regardless of whether they are the majority or not. Then again.. that's just my [radical, as of the results of this 2004 election] opinion..... :rolleyes: )

Maybe I mis-read your response..but did you answer the question they way you think things SHOULD be..or the way they WOULD be? My question is could a minister lose their license or get sued if they refuse to marry a gay person....if gay marriage was legal.

This is 100% what I am saying. The right of a religious organization to decide what people and actions it gives its blessing to is absolute -- it's part and parcel of the right to free exercise of religion. So for example, if you want to start up a KKK church and only marry white couples, that's fine and dandy in the eyes of the law, and you will still get your tax exemption and everything. The same is true right now in Massachusetts where gay marriage is legal -- the state recognizes gay peoples' right to CIVIL marriage, but there is no right to be married in a particular church. No pastor and no church will be in any danger whatsoever from choosing not to perform them, and it goes without saying that Catholic, Baptist, etc. churches do not. You don't even have to let gay people into your church building if you don't want to, much less marry them.

Ivy, former teaching assistant in Constitutional Law

It sounds as if you're attempting to paint the legality of gay marriage as if it can/will occur in a vacuum. This will affect others that do not want to accept it. Someone will have to perform the ceremonies...whether its in a Justice of the Peace or in VEgas...and if they refuse to do it....best believe the trial lawyers will have a field day. Day care providers may not want to accept children that have 2 daddies etc., neighborhoods will be sued if its even a thought that people were rejected because they're homosexual.. I'm just bringing up examples to show you that legalizing gay marriage will force others to accept it...and if they don't..they'll be penalized...

It only starts with the church..but the implications are there in other arenas as well..

IvySpice,
Can you clarify for me if homosexuals are currently a protected minority? I thought that it was currently illegal to discriminate against a child w/two daddies or against two women who want to move into an apartement together, even if the couples aren't married.
Also, it seems to me that everyone is going to be affected by this issue no matter what. Often law suits are what bring about changes in the laws. Whether or not gay marriage is recognized, gay couples will still file law suits if they feel that they are being treated unfairly. They will continue to file them until they feel that they are being treated justly. And eventually they will start to win. (Edited so that my meaning is clear) - Therefore, denying gay marriage is not going to protect us from having to face the "gay" issue.
And so what if everyone else has to deal with or is affected by this issue. This is no different from the racist white concierge having to check me into his hotel, even though it is killing him that a ni**a is sleeping on his sheets and swimming in his pool. I have never heard that allowing equal rights is optional if it makes others uncomfortable. (Edited so that my meaning is clear) - Equal rights is something that EVERYONE gets by virtue of being a citizen in this country. This includes those who can blend in with the mainstream and those who can't.

Marie

Marie,
That was the point I was making. People keep saying that gay marriage will not affect anyone...and that who they marry is their business...well you just made the point better than I did...EVERYONE Is going to be affected by this..

And lastly, if you were gay and checked into that hotel..you could have hid that if you wanted to...when you're black...you can't hide or change your mind about it. (unless you're Michael Jackson of course)

Good point Lovespell!!! We should deny gays rights because they can HIDE IT to avoid offending the poor ignorant people around them. Lucky them!! :rolleyes:

I know I'm going to be attacked for this, but of all people, I think that you as an AFRICAN AMERICAN should understand why gays need rights.

In my opinion, the way the country is treating gays is the same way they treated blacks not too long ago (and sometimes still treat blacks).

Pretending they are less than human, trying to deny them rights that they should be given as a human, and as a citizen in this country.

DO YOU THINK DENYING YOUR BLACKNESS IS AN ALTERNATIVE TO RECEIVING EQUAL RIGHTS AS A BLACK AMERICAN? Well, if we just pretend that you aren't black, then we don't have to give you any rights!

THAT IS EXACTLY THE WAY WE ARE TREATING THE GAY COMMUNITY.

There were plently of people that thought it was "disgusting" for a black person to marry a white person. Do you still think that is wrong?


~~~~~~

second question -- for lovespell:

you never answered my other post. While I am straight and have been in a relationship for over 2 years, pretend I was in a loving SAME SEX relationship instead. Also pretend I'm ready to get married.

Please explain to me (A JEWISH AMERICAN) why I am not allowed to get married, and/or why YOU think I should be denied this right.


P.S. Marie -- cosign ;)

Yes, you are going to be “attacked”. Let me be the first.

I am insulted by your presumption that Black people should understand gay people. The two aren't the same--never have been, never will be. Do you claim that your religious/ethnic designation as a Jew gives you insight into the lives of Black people? While there are a few Black people who can "pass", we generally do not have the "luxury" or ability to change our name and start life without the stigma of our race. It is not up to us to let people know whether we're Black or not--it's known when we walk into the room. However, let's not get it twisted, I LOVE being Black! It is the very permanent nature of Blackness that has forced us to become the diverse, creative, culture that we are.

If we continue to use the illustration started by Lovespell, it sounds like “you people” (how does THAT feel?) are more apt to identify with homosexuals than Black Americans.

Now, let me give you a very succinct reason why the issue of minority civil liberty is different from that of gay marriage: The government recognizes and rewards marriage for one reason only—it is that, for the most part, within the institution of marriage, children are born and cared for. The government WANTS people to have kids to maintain the population. Two black people can lay down (or stand up for that matter) and create a child as can a black person with a white person, Asian person, or Hispanic person. Gay marriages CANNOT add to the population and is therefore not important to the government.

Very good points and I am in total agreement with you.

I'm tired of the argument that the fight for gay rights is like the civil rights movement...it's not. There is no way for me to deny my blackness. However, there are PLENTY of gays who deny it to receive the benefits of inclusion granted to straight people. There is no comparison.

On a federal level, they are NOT a protected class. It is no violation of federal law to discriminate against homosexuals in any way you choose. Some states and cities (like Wisconsin and Denver) have state/local anti-discrimination laws which forbid this kind of discrimination. Right now most states and cities do not have such laws. In Alabama or Kansas, you can throw Dick Cheney's daughter out of your hotel, make her come to the back door of your restaurant, pay her less for the same work, or whatever else you want, and that is 100% legal.

LoveSpell, I thought you asked for a _legal_ opinion, and I gave it. I'll state it again:

Churches and pastors can do absolutely whatever they want, forever. That will never change.

Certain government employees such as judges have sworn to uphold the law, and they could theoretically be required to perform ceremonies in those states that allow gay marriage. They also have to enforce the death penalty even if they think it's murder, etc. If you believe that the law is so evil that you cannot in good conscience enforce it, you have to resign from that kind of job.

Public accommodations such as landlords, insurance companies, etc. are presently governed by state law in this area, and some states have passed anti-discrimination laws. These laws apply only within that state. Under these laws, you can sometimes be sued for refusing to serve gay customers or for firing a gay employee. (Although, I pray to God, you aren't really serious about day care providers discriminating against a three-year-old child because they don't agree with his parents.)

>legalizing gay marriage will force others to accept it

It isn't gay marriage that forbids the kind of discrimination you describe -- it's anti-discrimination laws. As I said above, some states already have these laws. I'm not sure what you mean about neighborhoods rejecting people, but if you're a gated community or a real estate agent in New York and you refuse to sell a house to a gay person, that is already illegal, even though there is no gay marriage there.

IN SUMMARY: you don't have to like, approve, agree, bless, or go to church with anyone you don't want, and you will never have to. However, you may have to serve or hire them in your secular business, or live next door to them, depending on the state. Further, if you work for the government at a job where you have taken an oath to apply the law, then you must apply the law, even if you disagree with it.

Legal Diva, this is an inaccurate statement of the law. Read Turner v. Safley; the Supreme Court unanimously stated that legally recognized marriage has many purposes that have nothing to do with children, and that the right to marry cannot be denied on the basis that the marriage cannot produce children or help to raise them.

This may be why you or your church recognize and reward marriage, and that's perfectly legitimate; it's just not why the government does.

Pretend it was the 1960s and pretend you COULD "deny your blackness" and pass as white. Would you? Do you think you should have to? Would you rather be accepted for who you are, or do you think you should be forced to "pass" as white/straight/whatever in order to get the same rights as everyone else?

In response to the other poster, in a way I *do* feel like I can relate better to the gay minority because I am a religious minority, maybe moreso. I understand what it is like to be persecuted, to have very ignorant things said in front of you by someone that might not realize that you are part of that minority group, and also what it feels like for the majority group (in this case very religious christians) who feel that their way is the only way, and use this as justification to shove their beliefs down my throat. I completely respect their right to have a different belief than me, but I draw the line when it infringes on my rights.

Ex: People legislating on gay marriage because of religious beliefs that I do not share.

However, you can not CHANGE your blackness. Gay people can not CHANGE their sexuality (unless they are hiding it to avoid persecution, but they are still gay). I COULD choose to change my religion, but I don't think I should be forced to just to get equal rights.

However, I'll drop the parallel between gay rights and black rights.

Perhaps you could "pass" but eventually you would be found out - your birth certificate lists your race. Unless your family has been paying people off for a long long long time.

There isn't anything anywhere that states you are a homosexual (practicing or non) unless YOU say it. You can't see it when you look at someone, and even if you engage in sexual practices that gays do, it doesn't mean you are gay (i.e. prisoners).

Until it's proven without a doubt scientifically that the inclination to be gay is something you are born with - the same as you are born with blue eyes or black skin or big feet - this argument will never end.

do you think that minorities should have to try to pass as the majority to get equal civil rights?

this includes minorities of race, religion and sexual preference

No, I don't. I think that gays in long term relationships should be able to make decisions like whether or not to pull the plug on a comatose partner, and be on each other's health care.

But it isn't the same as being a different race. You CAN hide gayness (or your religion) if you choose to. You CAN'T hide blackness. If you try to, you will be found out.

I'm not saying the struggles of gays or religious minorities are not valid, but that DOESN'T mean they are the same as those of racial minorities.