Next Big Debate, Obergefell v. Hodges, Gay Marriage

LGBT Marriages

Apr. 28, 2015, the US Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges concluded that gay marriage is a right guaranteed by the US Constitution.

Next big debate now that Roe has ended, many believe Obergefell should be next.

Not only was it unbiblical but is it unconstitutional?

I know where I stand but let us do a poll.

Answer and explain your answer.

Well, because this is a democracy, the only way I see clear is sending it back to the states. But I don't believe these judges have that kind of moxy. Especially before elections.

In this nation (U.S), marriage is defined by the law of the land and law is (either individually or by representation) made by the consent of the governed.

In a kingdom, the governed are subject to the king. In the U.S., the government is subject to the people.

I am normally all for States rights but like abortion I actually believe like slavery it should be outlawed federally on a national level.

Same with LGBT marriage. I see it as a national security issue. Therefore Biblical marriage should be the law of the land and protected by federal and state laws.

As a nation we have a death rate problem.

We are seeing a rise in mothers dying in giving birth.

We see the disastrous effects of unhealthy families on society.

This costs taxpayers billions of dollars and lots of heartache.

But returning it to the states is the right direction but it needs to go further eventually.

Let the people pass an amendment securing Biblical marriage as a Constitutional right.

How do you figure?

Also, how does one make a case for any marriage arrangement under the law of the U.S. if it cannot include all consenting adults of legal age?

A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States). When the OFR verifies that it has received the required number of authenticated ratification documents, it drafts a formal proclamation for the Archivist to certify that the amendment is valid and has become part of the Constitution.

In 2021, Republicans will have full control of the legislative and executive branch in 23 states. Democrats will have full control of the legislative and executive branch in 15 states.

To get 38 states is very difficult but not impossible if we keep working at the heart of the culture.

I listed the reasons why in the same post. All those issues harm the nation. Also broken homes make for weak men as boys grow up. We need men for law enforcement and the military.

Here’s Biden saying marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman. And it wasn’t a gaffe.

https://rumble.com/v1658lt-this-is-...kD4E3xvASIdpCJeqGqz9cbVCGOsugqzczuE&fs=e&s=cl

And where are the studies that show that LGBT marriages cause these conditions? Or that marriages between men and women prevent these conditions? And are you defining "weak men" as "homosexual men"? Where are those studies?

As I recall GM was approved in part by the citing of the 14th amendment.
Interestingly, that is the same amendment that was invoked, among other points, when the SC approved abortion years ago.

Thomas said gay marriage and their prior ruling regarding birth control should all be repealed.

I have no issue with GM. It's a state civil union. Not a marriage under God.

Nope....not a good idea whatsoever.

We need to go back further in time and go to the one that took prosecuting homosexual activity out of state's ability to criminalize. That was in 2003.

In some states it was a misdemeanor and in others a felony. Others had it completely legal.

So....if this "privacy" declared right is overturned and returned to the states as it had been....then same sex marriage is automatically overturned.

I don't know how to answer your poll so I'll give an answer as to my own thoughts.

Homosexuality has a very long history in the world up through this day, and while it's a deviation from normal human sexuality, the fact that it exists and will continue to exist is something we must keep in mind.

Couple that with the fact that there are legal benefits that heterosexuals enjoy when they have legal social unions (otherwise known as marriage) I don't believe depriving people of those same legal benefits under the law is constitutional.

Our mainly protestant society has never accepted homosexuals on an equal standing, but I would think legally as a point of law, we can't rule against gay marriage because our constitution is based on the premise all people are equal in the eyes of the law.

All we can hope to do, is to change the hearts and minds of the people once more towards God, and that's a job for God, but we can work with Him whenever possible.

First the most obvious evidence is reproduction. You can not increase a nations birth rate by promoting a homosexual marriage approving culture.

Statistics:

Homes without a biological mom

Children are more vulnerable during the first two years when they need close physical proximity to their mother. At this age, children cannot communicate effectively, and mothers are better at understanding the needs of infants.

Studies show that mothers are unique in providing care during childhood in many ways and better than fathers. Thus, to a degree, they cannot be replaced, and separation can have an impact on the child’s development

1. Fitzgibbons RP. Growing up with gay parents: What is the big deal?*. Linacre Q. 2015;82(4):332-336. doi:10.1179/0024363915Z.000000000120

https://womanjunction.com/growing-up-without-mother/

Fatherless Homes:



https://www.fatherhood.org/father-absence-statistic

So far I hope you can see why having both mom and dad is important for society.

I'm defining weak men only in the sense of sociology. So having a nation of men, as criminals, mentally ill, poor, abusive, lazy, etc is not good for mothers, not good for children, not good for police officers, not good for the military, not good as doctors or judges and not good for holding political office.

The rise and fall of civilizations depend on strong masculine men and strong feminine woman.

Would you have an issue if the government took 40% of your paycheck to pay for their medical bills due to the high-risk of the LGBT community? Or when a child who grew up without a father falls statistically into crime and steals your purse or wallet?

I'm wondering what the statistics are for homosexual parent homes.

The homosexual community doesn't like it when their crime stats are published. They suck.

You sound like that holds potential for the future. That's happening now. Citizens and illegals are sustained by our taxes.

We didn't vote for that.

Same as any other sin. It will exist but we can minimize the damage by laws and enforcement of those laws.

It is constitutional. We deprive pedophiles from having relations with children. It is no different.

Equality is only in this context:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men....

The Bible tells us that God ordained government for our good. A good government is supposed to secure our God given rights.

We are created equal in the context of our God given rights. The founders by majority held to the Biblical God and English law which also defined marriage as the Bible defines marriage.

All men are created equal, but equal to what? The unalienable GOD given rights. This 1913 case below explains the thinking of the founders.

Grigsby v. Reib, 153 S.W. 1124 (Tex. 1913)

Marriage was not originated by human law. When God created Eve, she was a wife to Adam; they then and there occupied the status of husband to wife and wife to husband. When God created the first pair, He gave the command: "Multiply and replenish (people) the earth," which was enjoined upon their expulsion from the garden.

therefore, we conclude that "the common law of England" adopted by the Congress of the Republic was that which was declared by the courts of the different States of the United States. This conclusion is supported by the fact that the lawyer members of that Congress who framed and enacted that statute had been reared and educated in the United States and would naturally *Page 601 have in mind the common law with which they were familiar.


Do you believe pedophiles should have equal protection under the law? Why or why not?

The equal protection clause:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

Equal protection of the laws. Which law did the court pull from in past marriage cases? Marriage by law has always been defined as a covenant, religious and civil marriage between one man and one woman.

In reality, we have statistics showing the harmful effects on kids who grow up without a biological father or a biological mother. We also have statistics on birth/death rates in the US. We have the science showing how dangerous and unhealthy LGBT lifestyles are.

This is why we do not allow equality with destructive behaviors.

I know. It is happening now but that is why I was asking how do you have no issue with it?

Post 14 has a few statistics. But yes, the statistics are typically no good. More research is always needed for updated stats on the rising trend. We are just now really getting to long-term data.