Law School Discussion

I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...

Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #680 on: February 10, 2008, 10:17:35 AM »
Homosexual relationships are generally unstable & a gay couple's children will have obvious identity and stability problems.]

Excuse me?

Your excused.

My excused what?

Miss P

  • *****
  • 19300
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #681 on: February 10, 2008, 10:25:23 AM »
rational basis is not an obstacle to striking down a ban on gay marriage.  Cleburne rational basis test for striking down a statute: (1) laws that rest on "irrational prejudice" or (2) laws which aren't applied to similarly situated people.

(2) can be articulated in two ways, either (2a) that the minority group doesn't have the "different" trait ascribed to it, or (2b) it does have the difference, but so does another group that has the right the minority group argues it should have.

souter, kennedy, ginsburg, stevens, thomas = 5

Thomas dissent in Lawrence: "I write separately to note that the law before the Court today “is … uncommonly silly.” If I were a member of the Texas Legislature, I would vote to repeal it. Punishing someone for expressing his sexual preference through noncommercial consensual conduct with another adult does not appear to be a worthy way to expend valuable law enforcement resources."  (he says he dissented because he finds no right to privacy  in the constitution).

lesson = tying gay marriage to abortion is a bad move.

I haven't really read the thread (weakly hiatusing), but I agree with Luke's Plyler/Cleburne analysis above -- on a normative if not emprical level.  I think this is the best way to spin a hypothetical same-sex marriage case before the Supreme Court.  

I also think the Loving analogy based on sex/gender discrimination (a man is allowed the sublime opportunity to marry me, a woman, but a woman is not)(I think Outlaw22 was advancing this) is a good argument (one that prevailed in Hawaii pre-constitutional amendment and in two concurrences and the principal dissent in Massachusetts, Vermont, and New York, respectively).  Under those state constitutions (I think) sex discrimination receives strict scrutiny, but it still receives intermediate scrutiny in the Supreme Court: a specific, important governmental objective + substantial relation to the achievement of that objective (Craig v. Boren, etc.) such that the government demonstrates an "exceedingly persuasive justification" for the classification (U.S. v. Virginia).  I think it's pretty clear that the non-religious justifications advanced by same-sex marriage opponents would not meet the heightened Virginia test, but I have trouble imagining our Supreme Court seeing it the same way in this political climate.

But the bigger problem, as I see it, is that it's extremely unlikely that this Court will take up a state same-sex marriage case anytime soon (it has already declined to take up DOMA challenges several times).  For one, it would require a state supreme court to decide the case based on the federal constitution, which would be folly I wouldn't put to the high court of any state.  I could be wrong, of course, but these are my thoughts in brief.

Miss P

  • *****
  • 19300
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #682 on: February 10, 2008, 10:25:54 AM »
My excused what?

llol.  ::applauds::

Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #683 on: February 10, 2008, 10:33:32 AM »
My excused what?

llol.  ::applauds::

::curtseys, like a proper and feminine lady::

Elephant Lee

  • ****
  • 4664
  • Maybe ju an' me are amigos!
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #684 on: February 10, 2008, 11:00:33 AM »
a gay couple's children will have obvious identity and stability problems. Of course, with a 50% divorce rate, marriages are pretty unstable currently.

...If homosexual activists showed that they have somewhere near a 50% long-term relationship rate & produced children who became productive citizens, maybe support for their unions would materialize.
1. What you say is obvious has no empirical support.
2. How would they demonstrate that? By what standard? Were such standards ever applied to heterosexual relationships--especially the 50% part? It seems like you're just throwing random stuff out there. For instance, I've been in 3 or so relationships. Only one has been long term--the one with my wife. That's a 33% long term relationship rate. So should people like myself be banned from marriage or child-rearing?

Astro

  • *****
  • 9930
  • Happy birthday goalie!!!
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #685 on: February 10, 2008, 11:52:54 AM »
Homosexual relationships are generally unstable & a gay couple's children will have obvious identity and stability problems.


This is patently false.

t...

  • ****
  • 2365
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #686 on: February 10, 2008, 12:03:37 PM »
I dunno, I found it pretty convincing.


::vomits::

Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #687 on: February 10, 2008, 03:11:03 PM »
The benefits given to marriage should remain because of the government's legitimate interest in supporting stable families. Stable families mean more stable children & productive citizens. Homosexual relationships are generally unstable & a gay couple's children will have obvious identity and stability problems. Of course, with a 50% divorce rate, marriages are pretty unstable currently.

The rational basis test applies, until the court states otherwise. It meets the test because it supports stable families as it's designed to.

If homosexual activists showed that they have somewhere near a 50% long-term relationship rate & produced children who became productive citizens, maybe support for their unions would materialize.

Your post isn't even deserving of a reply, but I just got back from an Obama townhall meeting/rally so I'm feeling particularly "hopeful" that even people like you can change.

Here's an excerpt from an American Academy of Pediatrics article. I'd say they have a little more expertise when it comes to this matter. You can read the rest of the article here. You might actually learn something.  http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/118/1/349

"Concern has been raised that social stigmatization might lead to teasing and embarrassment for children about their parent's sexual orientation or their family constellation and restrict their ability to form and maintain friendships. Adult children of divorced lesbian mothers have recalled more teasing by peers during childhood than have adult children of divorced heterosexual parents. In general, children whose parents are gay or lesbian have been found to have normal relationships with childhood peers and to maintain social relationships appropriate for their developmental levels.

Children born to and raised by lesbian couples seem to develop in ways that are indistinguishable from children raised by heterosexual parents. Ratings by their mothers and teachers have demonstrated children's social competence and the prevalence of behavioral difficulties to be comparable with population norms. In fact, growing up with parents who are lesbian or gay may confer some advantages to children. They have been described as more tolerant of diversity and more nurturing toward younger children than children whose parents are heterosexual.

In one study, children of heterosexual parents saw themselves as being somewhat more aggressive than did children of lesbian parents, and they were seen by parents and teachers as more bossy, negative, and domineering. Children of lesbian parents saw themselves as more lovable and were seen by parents and teachers as more affectionate, responsive, and protective of younger children, compared with children of heterosexual parents.30 In another investigation, children of lesbian parents reported their self-esteem to be similar to that of children of heterosexual parents and saw themselves as similar in aggressiveness and sociability."


Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #688 on: February 10, 2008, 04:00:54 PM »
Plain common sense might also suggest that growing up is sort of difficult, in general.  For a period of my childhood my father had a Dodge Aries station wagon. WITH STICK ON WOOD TRIM AND VINYL SEATS.

I would have much prefered he just had a boyfriend. 

LOL. You win.

Miss P

  • *****
  • 19300
    • View Profile
Re: I can't honestly be the only conservative on here...
« Reply #689 on: February 10, 2008, 05:29:24 PM »
There's also the fact that most gay and lesbian families either (a) had to work very hard to have children or (b) are former single parents with children from previous heterosexual relationships who, by way of incorporating their new partners, are adding to the family's financial and emotional stability.