Obama to fire gay military officer. Martinus pops vein.

[garbon]

Why are you so mean to me?

Why do you say such horrible things?

[Berkut]

I'm going to guess you just posted that mess of crazy for kicks...and thus it isn't worthy of response.

I think he is afraid if he doesn't post something like that regularly, someone else may steal his title of Most Bigoted Languish Poster.

What's so bigoted in my response? I am not saying straight parents can't raise happy gay children. I am saying that all other things being equal, probably a gay kid would find himself slightly less conflicted when raised by a gay couple than by a straight couple.

I suspect that a kid growing up is going to find himself conflicted or not absed on much more than the sexuality of his parents.

For example, if he were raised by a gay drama queen who insisted on making every single issue in his life about his homosexuality, that would probably fuck him up more than anything else.

"What? You got a B in social science! That teacher is a homophobe!"

[saskganesh]

2-21 Marty doesn't want kids. he just wants a clone.

:minime:

[Sheilbh]

"What? You got a B in social science! That teacher is a homophobe!"

I can't imagine how Marty would take it if his child came out as straight

[garbon]

I can't imagine how Marty would take it if his child came out as straight

He'd be like a black person raising a white child!

[crazy canuck]

Since the legislature already gave the Courts the jurisdiction to find any enactment unconstitutional, I am not sure what point you are trying to make.

In the US, this isn't the case; courts get their "judicial power" from the Constitution, not legislation.

In the US presumably the constutitution was drafted and amended by US legislators.

[Sheilbh]

He'd be like a black person raising a white child!

No, that's fine.  That would be like a normal gay person raising a straight kid.

Marty's not a normal gay person :p

[Neil]

I always thought that "straight" people who claim that homosexuality is a choice must have chosen to be straight, and thus they must have at least considered the question... 

You can't choose to be what you are.  Everyone is straight, until they decide that it would be trendy to be gay.

[Valmy]

In the US presumably the constutitution was drafted and amended by legislators.

The Constitution was delivered to George Washington by Jesus.

[crazy canuck]

In the US presumably the constutitution was drafted and amended by legislators.

The Constitution was delivered to George Washington by Jesus.

"Here are your 15" *drops one tablet* "umm 10 commandments".

[derspiess]

"Here are your 15" *drops one tablet* "umm 10 commandments".

[The Minsky Moment]

Wow, Reagan actually said that? My opinion of him just improved a lot. No wonder Jack Kemp considered him a puppet of the gay lobby. 

the guy worked in Hollywood, how homophobic could he be?

[The Minsky Moment]

I don't think even the constitution expressly delegates to the courts "the power to find any enactment unconstitutional". That's simply false.

It doesn't - Marshall found the power to be inherent in the nature of judicial power in the context of a written constitution.

Controversial perhaps but that bus long left the station long ago.

[The Minsky Moment]

That sounds wonderful in theory, but when you get to the point of legislating from the bench, the system is being abused.

yeah - that was the old argument against Brown v. Board of Ed.

The requirement of equal treatment under the law is pretty basic - you don't need to reach deep into the substantive due process grab bag.  If a state passed a law that said that Fred can enter into a real estate contract with Mary but not with Joe because Joe is a man, that wouldn't fly.  The same analysis holds if you change real estate contract to marriage contract.

[DontSayBanana]

yeah - that was the old argument against Brown v. Board of Ed.

The requirement of equal treatment under the law is pretty basic - you don't need to reach deep into the substantive due process grab bag.  If a state passed a law that said that Fred can enter into a real estate contract with Mary but not with Joe because Joe is a man, that wouldn't fly.  The same analysis holds if you change real estate contract to marriage contract.

Actually, I've been wondering how to broach this without sounding like a Marti sock, but does anyone know if this has been tried as a gender equality issue? I would think that would be pretty much a slam dunk, as the requirement isn't waived with multiple tests:

Person A (male) applies for a marriage license, and is refused because Person B is not female. Same for the converse.