Should the US Legislate Morality or Discrimination? ?

Question

Should the US legislate morality or discrimination?

If abortions are outlawed because they're "immoral," isn't that legislating morality?

And on whose morality should we base our laws since we are a Nation comprised of many faiths?

Should g*y marriage also be banned because it's "immoral" to some?

Should the US Government legislate discrimination, which is what banning g*y marriage would equate to?

Can we all agree that marriage can and should be defined as being between two consenting adults? That marriages between two men or two women do not need to be recognized by organized religion? And that the US Government should not discriminate against homosexuals and should recognize their marriages, grant them all of the same rights as a heterosexual marriage guarantees and stop treating them as second class citizens?

Answer 1

No I don't think a nation should legislate morality or discrimination.

That does not mean the US should not pass laws to the benefit of society.

For instance, banning abortion is about protecting innocent life.  I'm all in favor of protecting innocent life.  To me it's about securing their right to live.

Marriage is a contractual arrangement between the state and the couple.  The state is sanctioning this and the goal is to pro-create and also create a stable family unit to raise the off-spring in.  How does g*y marriage fit into that overall goal?

BTW, I'm not against g*y marriage, but I'm making the argument that there is a reason marriage is the way it is, beyond morals.  Personally I think we've come to the point where allowing g*y marriage is not going to harm our society, so we should allow it.

Answer 2

Prohibiting abortion is about protecting innocent life, which is a universal value that any free society will adopt once it progresses to a sufficient level of social stability.

The definition of marriage serves the needs of society and does not need to change (see Laissez-Faire Guy's response). There are other minority groups that would like to see redefinitions in our laws, too. For example, some Muslim Americans would like murder to be redefined, so honor killings are allowed. A functioning society needs a common set of values that are consistent with the majority view. Otherwise, the civilization will degrade and eventually dissolve, as the Roman Empire did.

Answer 3

First of all, we are a nation founded on the Christian Faith & the belief in God and the Bible.  Not only should God's word dictate our morality, but that tiny voice in our head called a conscious SHOULD tell us when we are doing the wrong thing.  If it's against the status quo, it's generally not the right thing to do.

Answer 4

I feel iffy about calling Guy committed relationships marriage, but right must be all the same.

I would outlaw bigotry and putting noses in other peoples private business though.

  

Answer 5

Too many questions, but if you're Republican, the answer is probably "yes"...if you're a Democrat, the answer is probably "no".

Answer 6

what about interspecies marriages? if it is immoral to most, then under your logic it should be legal? And since you think people should be able to do whatever they want with their bodies, are you for interspecies marriage?  

Answer 7

No, never.  Separation of church and state should definitely apply.  No one is in favor of more abortions but a legal safe setting for women who make that difficult decision is clearly the rational option. The best way to reduce abortions is not outlawing them but real openminded s*x education and easy access to preservatives, things a lot of conservatives also oppose. Every time conservatives block any effort to improve the lives and hard conditions of poor children, even denying them access to healthcare it shows how pro life they really are.

"In the United States, the wealthiest country in the world, 36 million Americans live in poverty - earning less than $20,650 for a family of four in 2007. Another one in six Americans struggle to make ends meet on incomes between 100% and 200% of poverty ( $20,650 to about $40,000 for a family of four). More than 12 million American children grow up in impoverished homes. When compared with 20 other wealthy nations on measures of health, safety and relative poverty, America's children fare amongst the worst."

http://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/why_sp...

The anti abortion crowd isn't "pro life", they're pro birth and anti woman.

Anything less than legal g*y marriage is discrimination, violates the fundamental principal of equal treatment under the law. That will not stand forever. The question is not if g*y marriage will be legal but when

Opponents of g*y marriage use many of the same arguments as foes of interracial relationships did before Loving v. Virginia outlawed state bans on interracial marriage in 1967

http://www.law.virginia.edu/html/news/20...

http://hnn.us/articles/4708.html

Many conservatives have a problem with g*y people and their civil rights for very different reasons than morality.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqcYJzc6l...

Answer 8

We already do legislate morality.  Killing is immoral, and that's why it became illegal.  Stealing is immoral, and that's why it became illegal.  This is why abortion should be legislated.

Morality is not absolute, it is relative.  We live in a representative democracy, let's vote on what is or isn't moral.  In fact, this is what we already do.

I think discrimination is immoral, so yes, it should legislate this as well.  g*y marriage is a bad example to pick in my opinion.  A marriage was defined through religion as a union between a man and a woman to produce a family.  g**s cannot produce children (but they can adopt); this makes it fundamentally different from a marriage.  To eliminate discrimination, some provision to afford g*y couples the same rights and benefits as a married couple should be created.

The state should not be allowed to redefine marriage.  Marriage is a religious institution, and separation of church and state works both ways.

Answer 9

Your argument does not take into consideration that homosexuality is viewed by many as a sexual deviance different but as deplorable as pedophilia, bestiality, and necrophiliacs.

This is not just an issue of morality.

It is also an issue of law and language, homosexuality is a protected right with homosexuals having MORE rights than straight citizens.

You beat up a homo it's a hate crime.

You fire a homo you fired him/her because of sexuality

Homosexuals are a protected species kinda like an endangered species. A modern day Dodo bird.

So just because the law doesn't recognize there union as a legal union or marriage does not mean that there rights are being violated.

It means there relationship does not meat the minimum requirements for marriage. That's it!!!!!!!

Whether you or other people believe that it's discriminatory or not. Sorry but that's the facts.

People in Mississippi who want to marry there cousin feel that because there union is not recognized by law it's discriminatory.

It's not!!!! Minimum requirements that's it.

And 2 men or 2 chicks getting married is wrong and disgusting anyways.

Answer 10

I completely agree.  It a country where we should have freedom for all, to many are still discriminated against.  Since we do not have a national faith it's unfair to push the beliefs of anyone on others.  

If marriage can't be for everyone then it shouldn't be for anyone.  The churchs can just marry people and the government should just find another way to tax people.

I just LOVE the "interspecies" argument.  Yeah.  Because a dog can sign it's name and enter into a legal binding contract.