Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
Thu Apr 30, 2015, 05:24 PM Apr 2015

Loving v. Marriage

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/loving-v-marriage/391730/

Only 35 years ago—a breath in the life of a culture—straight America saw gays and lesbians as forces of sexual anarchy who threatened a nation of happily married couples living in tidy houses with their beloved children.

In states where anti-gay initiatives were on the ballot, TV ads showed lesbians in leather and gays in spangles cavorting across the screen, accompanied by warnings that a “lifestyle” of deviant sex, pedophilia, and bestiality was about to drown us all.

Flash forward to April 28, 2015. John J. Bursch, the solicitor general of Michigan, explained to the Supreme Court that gay couples should not marry because they are too staid: They stand outside the anarchic swirl of straight sexuality that creates abandoned children and one-parent households.

Gays and lesbians—bless their naïve hearts—believe that marriage is about love, about commitment, about mutual support in sickness and health as long as we both shall live. But government, Bursch explained, knows that this is not true. Bursch was representing four states—Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee—whose constitutions ban same-sex marriage. The challengers are residents of those states, all involved in—or survivors of—committed and stable same-sex relationships. Except for their gender, they are models of the kind of family life Americans once believed to be menaced by the emergence of gay America from the shadows. But they should not win, Bursch said, because they falsely believe that “that marriage is all about love and commitment. And as a society, we can agree that that's important, but the State doesn't have any interest in that.”
1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Loving v. Marriage (Original Post) KamaAina Apr 2015 OP
Democracy = equality Iliyah Apr 2015 #1

Iliyah

(25,111 posts)
1. Democracy = equality
Thu Apr 30, 2015, 06:26 PM
Apr 2015

be it wealth, health and marriage. Love transcends, it judges no one because of their color, race, sex nor religion.

Loving vs. USA. The religious fanatics and white purity group said the same damn things that are being told today. These folks don't believe in any rules nor laws that do not adhere to their insane beliefs. Generations ago (or maybe not that long ago) these same people also believed one man and many wives, or better yet, keep it in the family.

Anywho, be back later . . . chow chow.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Loving v. Marriage