Delta4Embassy
Gold Member
If a homosexual relationship is legal, why isn't that the beginning and end of the marriage question? If such a relationship isn't breaking any laws, of course you can make it official with government recognized marriage. Isn't there some kind of legal provision like that akin to how marriages recognized in one state or country and recognized in every state, or the US? If a homosexual couple can enter into other legal contracts, aren't rbeaking any laws, they should be allowed to enter into the marriage one too. Challenges to bans on gay marriage though don't use arguements like that.
Why not put it like this: a homosexual couple rent a home together, both their names areon the rental contract which is fully recognized by their home state, and would be on the federal level if some issue arose. So why wouldn't their home state then also be compelled federally to recognize a marital contract too? Recognizing the legal standing of one but not others is clearly discriminatory and illegal.
Another possibility which just occured is make the marriage license a federal license which then every state HAS to recognize. Instead of leaving marriage a state-defined issue, if a ban against a gay marriage violates federal law and civil rights, make such contracts federal. Even though Colorado has legalized recreational use marijuana, federally it's still illegal so in principal at least the government could go in and make arrests. Same principle could work (I'd think, I'm not a lawyer) by taking marriage out of the hands of the states whole or in part making such arrangements a federal institution. States can still ban it, but ultimately because it's federal law, a state's ban o robjection can't be backed up in court.
Why not put it like this: a homosexual couple rent a home together, both their names areon the rental contract which is fully recognized by their home state, and would be on the federal level if some issue arose. So why wouldn't their home state then also be compelled federally to recognize a marital contract too? Recognizing the legal standing of one but not others is clearly discriminatory and illegal.
Another possibility which just occured is make the marriage license a federal license which then every state HAS to recognize. Instead of leaving marriage a state-defined issue, if a ban against a gay marriage violates federal law and civil rights, make such contracts federal. Even though Colorado has legalized recreational use marijuana, federally it's still illegal so in principal at least the government could go in and make arrests. Same principle could work (I'd think, I'm not a lawyer) by taking marriage out of the hands of the states whole or in part making such arrangements a federal institution. States can still ban it, but ultimately because it's federal law, a state's ban o robjection can't be backed up in court.
Last edited:
