Log in

View Full Version : Amendment Banning Gay Marriages?!



Pages : 1 [2]

Melonie
02-28-2004, 09:19 PM
As I've said before, I challenge anyone to develop a rationale for why that should be done which doesn't also support legalizing bigamy, which was outlawed in part to protect women's rights.

Well, these things are now all up for grabs as a result of the Supreme Court's recent ruling on the Texas Gay Couple/sodomy case. Abolishing sodomy as a crime throughout the USA as a result of this ruling has quickly led to demands for legalized gay marriage. But abolishing sodomy as a crime also opens the door for the abolishment of incest, bigamy/polygamy etc. on the same legal basis - that the private activities of two (or more) consenting adults in the privacy of their own bedroom is not the business of government or anyone else. Some scholars and commentators also point out that the very same "consenting adults in private" principle might very well apply to the abolishment of the crime of prostitution, as well as possibly applying to bestiality, necrophilia etc.

The fundamental doctrine of the recent Texas sodomy case is that governments no longer have the authority to judge the appropriateness of "private activities between consenting adults", no matter what the majority of voters might think about those activities, no matter what particular religions might think about those activities, no matter what society or tradition might think of those activities, and no matter what consequences might stem from those activities. So far only sodomy has been brought before the courts, but the door is certainly open for other types of "private activities between consenting adults".

Personally, I could care less about the legalizing of all of these possibilities (as long as I'm not required to watch LOL), save one. That one is legalization of prostitution - and only in the context of it becoming 100% legal for girls to offer 'extras' in the VIP rooms of dance clubs. I have heard that Larry Flynt of Hustler is in fact bankrolling and organizing just such a legal appeal, based on the premise that club VIP rooms should be entitled to the same privacy protection as motel and hotel rooms for whatever time period the customer has 'rented' the VIP room for, and also based on the premise that the dancer and customer enter the VIP room as "consenting adults". If this legal appeal actually succeeds, then it's a certainty that Hustler and DejaVu clubs will lead the way towards a rapid change in American strip clubs towards the European "sex club" model. Personally speaking, I'll retire before being forced to offer legalized 'extras' in order to work in a club.

Who would have thought that one pro-gay rights Supreme Court decision could eventually have so many unintended consequences ?

FONDL
02-29-2004, 08:40 AM
That's always the problem with changing long-established rules, there are always tons of unintended consequences, especially when you get lawyers and courts involved. Legalizing gay marriages will alter many other things as well. Which is why think the Supreme Court will stop it.

I also have question about some of the previous posts. Many of you seem to reject government as the legitimate source of rights (even though legal rights, which is what we're talking about here, are by definition those established by government.) Many of you also reject any mention of a God in connection with this whole topic. So my question is this: if rights shouldn't come from government or from God, where should they come from? Do we each get to decide our own rights?