Prop 8 overruled by gay judge!

[geekette]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Technically, the goats don't have the same standing before the court as two human beings. A better analogy perhaps might be two first cousins or a brother and sister couple seeking a marriage license. Perhaps bigamists as well.

States have historically made exclusions to marriage licenses. There have been examples of such statutes that were wrong - inter-racial marriage prohibitions for example.

States also didn't permit "chattel property" (aka "slaves") to marry because they could not legally consent--as property.

But "gay marriage" doesn't equate nor is it exemplary of inter-racial marriage. Inter-racial marriages were banned because of racist notions about the children of such unions. "Gay marriage" produces no children so the "racial" and discriminatory complaints don't even apply.

States have the right to control how children are "bred." It's an uncomfortable topic - but it is important. As a society we have stated that no marriage unions can exist between brother and sister and other closely related individuals because of the dangers of inbreeding. That is the basis of all marriage laws.

Gays do not represent anything even remotely related to "inbreeding" as they are not even breeding at all. Therefore, they have no standing (IMHO) in the marriage debate.

If a couple of bachelor gentlemen want to share housing to save expenses then it's probably not a whole lot of my business as long as they keep their lawns up. From my experience, these types tend to have fantastic lawns and gardens. So, hook up as you please, just don't come before the county clerk unless you have an issue involving human breeding.

Marriage is not strictly for procreation. We don't require prospective heterosexual couples undergo fertility tests prior to marriage. We let heterosexual couples marry who have absolutely no intention of having children. (Like elderly folks getting married for companionship.) Additionally, the judge talks in the opinion at length about the testimony he received on the impact of same-sex marriage on children and found the testimony that there was no difference between children from straight and gay marriages to be persuasive.