How can the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution be squared with the Free Exercise of Religion Clause of the 1st Amendment? That's the real issue. Most of you Canucks have no idea what I'm referring to do you? If you don't understand that issue what good is your opinion on the Supreme Court decision that came down today?
For everything gained something is lost. That's a universal rule which requires a cost/benefit analysis on a societal level.
Should queers in SSM be allowed to have equal rights? Yes from the standpoint of Individual Liberty. That ideal demands Personal Autonomy. Personal Autonomy insists that each individual make his/her/its own decisions.
But to the extent the male/female marriage is diminished by becoming merely one type of relationship, the traditional nuclear family is diminished. How so? There is something more important than love. It's the family structure based on blood lines. Lineage. People are hardwired by evolution to do anything for the lives of their issue by blood to ensure their DNA survives into the future.
Today's decision by the Supreme Court demotes the traditional family and opens the way for new conceptions of family. If three people love each other why shouldn't they be permitted to marry? Why shouldn't childless adult incestuous couples be allowed to marry. After all, it's just love isn't it?
Why did the single male/single female based family evolve? Why not have families structured like wolfpacks? What role does society legitimately have in structuring its organization for maximum future success? I doubt these issues were considered by the Supreme Court, but the issues aren't going away.
For everything gained something is lost. That's a universal rule which requires a cost/benefit analysis on a societal level.
Should queers in SSM be allowed to have equal rights? Yes from the standpoint of Individual Liberty. That ideal demands Personal Autonomy. Personal Autonomy insists that each individual make his/her/its own decisions.
But to the extent the male/female marriage is diminished by becoming merely one type of relationship, the traditional nuclear family is diminished. How so? There is something more important than love. It's the family structure based on blood lines. Lineage. People are hardwired by evolution to do anything for the lives of their issue by blood to ensure their DNA survives into the future.
Today's decision by the Supreme Court demotes the traditional family and opens the way for new conceptions of family. If three people love each other why shouldn't they be permitted to marry? Why shouldn't childless adult incestuous couples be allowed to marry. After all, it's just love isn't it?
Why did the single male/single female based family evolve? Why not have families structured like wolfpacks? What role does society legitimately have in structuring its organization for maximum future success? I doubt these issues were considered by the Supreme Court, but the issues aren't going away.
irate:
