Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
We are in the beginnings of the movement to normalize homosexuality socially and legally. I happen to see those who voted against gay equality under the law as being bigoted. I see this as being very similar to racial bigotry.
|
Then they're going about it in a piss-poor manner. The end result is most likely going to be a Constitutional Amendment which will bar what you see as full equality, and the vast majority of the country sees as special privilege. FYI: Constitutional Amendments are AUTOMATICALLY Constitutional upon ratification, and therefore are not subject to being overturned by the Courts.
Quote:
|
In a gay relationship no member is property. If the person is dead or it we are talking about an animal (non-human) or an object, then the other party is property. You cannot marry property.
|
But you keep seeming to miss the point of WHY you can't marry property. Marriage, as we're talking about in this case, is a statutorily defined artifice. Under current law, it's illegal for a same sex couple to marry, correct? At the same time, under current law, it's illegal for a human to marry a dog, right? These are both things which are EXPLICITLY spelled out in the code. The ONLY thing preventing ANY form of marriage which is currently illegal is the fact that the specific type of marriage IS ILLEGAL. Remove the statutory barrier, and it become legal. You say "Remove this barrier, but leave that barrier intact." WHY?
Quote:
|
The legal rights of the deceased are greatly limited (and can be compared to those of an animal actually). A dog cannot legally own a human, whether the ownership is total or partial. If a marriage of human and animal (illegal as of right now) were hypothetically legal, then the animal would be allowed many rights, but the animal could not have the cognitive abilities to raise a human child. The dog (using dog as an example) could not teach the child social skills or real world lessons besides that which a dog knows. What the dog knows is limited to what it is trained to do and what is inate. What the dog can be trained to do is at a maximum the ability to keep the child from immediate danger. An animal cannot legally own property. Our constitution and amendments are here for the rights of people.
|
So you're saying that what makes a marriage is the ability to RAISE a child? Really? Are you SURE you want to stick with that?
Quote:
Nope. I'm a moron! 
|
...
Quote:
|
The dead person is not allowed to make any legal decisions after he or she dies (with the exception of recessitation). That's rather obvious. Consent is given before the death. If the person consents to necrophilia before death, that's up to a judge. If the person has dies and did not stipulate any such arrangement, then it is illegal.
|
Sorry, it's illegal almost everywhere REGARDLESS of if consent is given while the person is alive.