Marriage has never been a Fundamental right for ANYONE, homosexual or heterosexual

I came across this post. I don’t think I could have said it any better. Please enjoy!

One of the most prevalent arguments I have seen in recent weeks against Proposition 8 is that the amendment is wrong because it would treat people separately but equal. Those who are against Proposition 8 argue that being able to “marry who you love” is a fundamental right, and the “separate but equal” treatment violates that right.

This argument against Proposition 8 not only mischaracterizes the issue, but does so in a way that is calculated to put supporters of traditional marriage on the defensive. The right to marry has never been an unfettered right. Even today, we maintain important restrictions on the right of individuals to marry. (For example, not permitting marriage between close relatives or prohibiting someone from being married to two people at the same time).

There is nothing in the text of either the California or United States Constitution that explicitly provides that same sex marriage is a “fundamental right.” Nor is there anything in our nation’s history or traditions that establish same sex marriage as a “fundamental right.” Only three states, Massachusetts, California, and Connecticut, even allow same sex marriage and all three states only recently “discovered” this right after their Supreme Courts ruled in closely divided decisions (4-3 votes in all three states) that such a right existed.

While, as a society, we may want to add individual rights, those rights are not necessarily “fundamental rights” and, in a democracy, weighty decisions such as creating new rights should be decided by a vote of the people—not judges.

The “separate but equal” argument is also misleading because Proposition 8 does not treat people separately. If Proposition 8 passes, no one will be prevented from marrying. Individuals in California will be free to marry so long as they marry someone of the opposite gender and so long as the marriage does not violate other long-standing regulations governing marriage in California.

Those who persist in arguing for the “fundamental right” to “marry who you love” face an additional hurdle. If everyone has the right to marry who you love, why wouldn’t three women who love each other be allowed to marry? What about polygamous marriage? Shouldn’t consenting adults in these types of relationships have the right to marry?

If same sex marriage is permissible because an individual has the right to marry whomever he or she loves, the only intellectually honest reason for prohibiting these types of extreme alternative marriages is that they are not socially acceptable. But once you accept that society has a right to limit some marriage relationships , you recognize society’s right to also define marriage in a way that benefits society as a whole. That is exactly what Proposition 8 does. That is why I’m voting for it.

SOURCE: http://prop8discussion.wordpress.com/2008/10/20/separate-but-equal/

For more info, you might also be interested in this video from the What is Prop 8? website:

A Civil Right?

Advertisements

October 25, 2008. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Uncategorized.

5 Comments

  1. standingfortruth2008 replied:

    Good post, Keep blogging. We are sprinting towards Nov 4. Vote yes on Prop 8!

    The Skinny on Schools and Prop 8.

    1 – Public schools in California are not required to teach anything about marriage.

    2 – 96 percent of California public schools teach a Health and Sex Ed Curriculum, which is my understanding is required under law (but I cannot find that online yet from the State, I am still looking).

    3 – If a public school teaches Health and Sex Ed, they are required to teach the following :

    “Instruction shall be appropriate for students of all genders, sexual orientations, and ethnic and cultural backgrounds…Instruction shall encourage communication between students and their families and shall teach respect for marriage and committed relationships.

    4 – This means that schools that teach Heath and Sex Ed will now be required to teach that Gay Marriage is the same as Marriage between a Man and a Woman.

    http://standingfortruth2008.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/prop-8-and-schools/

  2. beetlebabee replied:

    Did you know that France already went through this fight? I was shocked to learn that. France! of all countries. Who would figure they would be our allies in this?

    I have been looking into their studies. They actually REJECTED gay marriage because they found it hurt kids. I guess it shouldn’t surprise us that genders matter in child rearing, but it seems like in all the hullabaloo about so called “gay rights” we’ve forgotten about the kids’ rights. Kids have rights too.

    To hear the opposition tell it, you’d think we were the only backward country in the world that hadn’t already accepted the inevitable. Only five countries have legalized same sex marriage. France is one of the ones who studied it out first. They went to those five countries and saw what their choice had done to the stability of their countries. There are marked declines in health and family. It’s worth looking into, rather than just running full steam ahead into oblivion. I am always leery of people who want to guilt me into voting a certain way. It makes me want to say, so….what’s the other side? here it is.

    http://beetlebabee.wordpress.com/2008/10/23/childrens-rights-before-adult-preferences

  3. johnbisceglia replied:

    MARRIAGE – a Union between 2 Human Beings,
    embodying Love, Trust, and a Mutual Respect and Responsibility for the other.

    Isn’t quibbling about WHOM has WHAT plumbing called SEXISM?

    BTW – For those of who fidget and squirm every time I use the term “marriage”, you need to understand that committed relationships between 2 members of the same sex have existed since Time Immemorial – it’s just that these Sacred Unions have not had the legal protection that The Exalted Heterosexual Marriage enjoys.

  4. beetlebabee replied:

    John, I’m not sure why you and every other member of the same view I’ve met on these blogs walks around with this chip on their shoulder, but I extend an invitation to join the grown up world of reality. A responsible adult sometimes has to give up things they really want, for the greater good.

    You and the rest of our friends in the gay community ask us to accept changing the definition of marriage from one man and one woman, because their heart’s desires are excluded. Are we unfair? Biased? Bigoted? Homophobic? No. The idea that desires sometimes go unmet for the greater good is part of life for responsible adults. Gay marriage at the expense of our children’s development, and our social stability is not a responsible path. If my heart’s desire is to two partners, I am free to act on that desire, but I am not free to call it marriage, no matter how much I may want it and feel lost without it. The consequences for society are too great.

    The reason we have a Mother’s Day and a Father’s Day every year is to recognize the fact that good parenting requires sacrifices, and not just financial sacrifices. We hold in deep respect parents who put the needs of their children above their own freedom, goals, and desires.

    http://beetlebabee.wordpress.com/2008/10/21/whether-you-like-it-or-not/

  5. sarahespencer replied:

    Hey I read through your blog and I think this is a unique point. Come post more thoughts at this online debate:

    http://www.cruxlux.com/debate/2245/californians_should_vote_yes_on_prop_8

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback URI

%d bloggers like this: