100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Iowa Legallizes Gay Marriage | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
ok....gonna say this again.... IMHO i don't think the government should control who gets married (and yes it's a majority of the vote, i know) i lean more to the religious conservative side but i know the government needs to step out of things too. now with that said....can someone explain to me (maybe it has been already and it went oer my big head lol) how did it get into a states constitution who marry who? They utilized the religious definition of marriage to define marriage when it became an issue. This was also done back when interracial marriage was legalized. Are you saying they changed their constitution to read the way it is read now? Sorry, this whole constitution thing tends to confuse me. I don't remember the main case name but it was a black man and white woman who wanted to get married. They tried to utilize the biblical reference to stop them from getting married but it was eventually overturned to mean that ANY man and woman could be married within age limits and mental capability. This man -woman definition is what has stood until recently. Wasn't it because Adam and Eve were supposedly white? Talk about stretching it. 
You mean they weren't??? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Mon 04/06/09 06:57 PM
|
|
ok....gonna say this again.... IMHO i don't think the government should control who gets married (and yes it's a majority of the vote, i know) i lean more to the religious conservative side but i know the government needs to step out of things too. now with that said....can someone explain to me (maybe it has been already and it went oer my big head lol) how did it get into a states constitution who marry who? They utilized the religious definition of marriage to define marriage when it became an issue. This was also done back when interracial marriage was legalized. Are you saying they changed their constitution to read the way it is read now? Sorry, this whole constitution thing tends to confuse me. I don't remember the main case name but it was a black man and white woman who wanted to get married. They tried to utilize the biblical reference to stop them from getting married but it was eventually overturned to mean that ANY man and woman could be married within age limits and mental capability. This man -woman definition is what has stood until recently. Wasn't it because Adam and Eve were supposedly white? Talk about stretching it.
Well actually at one time they were trying to say it was because we were too different, like cat and dog or horse and goat. But then they brought up the different "tribes" in the bible. Then it was miscegenation or racial purity act. They threw everything at it trying to prevent it from happening including the kitchen sink. It got over turned though, which is right. Here is the short version http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ok....gonna say this again.... IMHO i don't think the government should control who gets married (and yes it's a majority of the vote, i know) i lean more to the religious conservative side but i know the government needs to step out of things too. now with that said....can someone explain to me (maybe it has been already and it went oer my big head lol) how did it get into a states constitution who marry who? They utilized the religious definition of marriage to define marriage when it became an issue. This was also done back when interracial marriage was legalized. Are you saying they changed their constitution to read the way it is read now? Sorry, this whole constitution thing tends to confuse me. I don't remember the main case name but it was a black man and white woman who wanted to get married. They tried to utilize the biblical reference to stop them from getting married but it was eventually overturned to mean that ANY man and woman could be married within age limits and mental capability. This man -woman definition is what has stood until recently. Wasn't it because Adam and Eve were supposedly white? Talk about stretching it.
You mean they weren't???
I don't know if they were white.  I remembering hearing that was the one of the reasons that they were using to not let black and white people get married. I should have said it better. That's what I thought they were stretching - the reason. lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Winx
on
Mon 04/06/09 07:43 PM
|
|
ok....gonna say this again.... IMHO i don't think the government should control who gets married (and yes it's a majority of the vote, i know) i lean more to the religious conservative side but i know the government needs to step out of things too. now with that said....can someone explain to me (maybe it has been already and it went oer my big head lol) how did it get into a states constitution who marry who? They utilized the religious definition of marriage to define marriage when it became an issue. This was also done back when interracial marriage was legalized. Are you saying they changed their constitution to read the way it is read now? Sorry, this whole constitution thing tends to confuse me. I don't remember the main case name but it was a black man and white woman who wanted to get married. They tried to utilize the biblical reference to stop them from getting married but it was eventually overturned to mean that ANY man and woman could be married within age limits and mental capability. This man -woman definition is what has stood until recently. Wasn't it because Adam and Eve were supposedly white? Talk about stretching it.
Well actually at one time they were trying to say it was because we were too different, like cat and dog or horse and goat. But then they brought up the different "tribes" in the bible. They threw everything at it trying to prevent it from happening including the kitchen sink. It got over turned though, which is right. The different tribes - Egyptian, etc., are different colors. lol Thank goodness someone had the sense to overturn it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I remember reading that the interracial marriage cases will be the forerunners to the gay and lesbian fight. It is true...lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ok....gonna say this again.... IMHO i don't think the government should control who gets married (and yes it's a majority of the vote, i know) i lean more to the religious conservative side but i know the government needs to step out of things too. now with that said....can someone explain to me (maybe it has been already and it went oer my big head lol) how did it get into a states constitution who marry who? They utilized the religious definition of marriage to define marriage when it became an issue. This was also done back when interracial marriage was legalized. Are you saying they changed their constitution to read the way it is read now? Sorry, this whole constitution thing tends to confuse me. I don't remember the main case name but it was a black man and white woman who wanted to get married. They tried to utilize the biblical reference to stop them from getting married but it was eventually overturned to mean that ANY man and woman could be married within age limits and mental capability. This man -woman definition is what has stood until recently. Wasn't it because Adam and Eve were supposedly white? Talk about stretching it.
You mean they weren't???
I don't know if they were white. I remembering hearing that was the one of the reasons that they were using to not let black and white people get married. I should have said it better. That's what I thought they were stretching - the reason. lol
I was just kidding with you, Winx. I never believed the story of Adam and Eve even as a kid, so I really didn't take it much further. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
