Kalley Yanta explains what experts on what both sides of the marriage debate say will happen if marriage is redefined.
"... the volume of new litigation will be immense."
"religious organizations, individuals that object to same-sex marriage will face a wave of new lawsuits under state anti-discrimination and other laws."
29 Comments
Oh, NO! You mean people will still have to follow the law even though they dont agree with it!? That NEVER happens...
Sounds like a lot of new business opportunities for the legal and judicial industry. One among the many economic blessings that this new cultural change offers to America, Wall Street and the West.
Business is looking good Austin. Anything for buck. That's America.
I'm glad that they were able to get into how it threatens religious liberty.
But that doesn't violate the "Separation of Church and State" right? Because as long as it's meant to suppress or destroy religious freedom then it's perfectly lawful.
Our Founders must be turning over in their graves.
These Minnesota Marriage Minutes are superb.
Here's hoping we can introduce similar treatments of these issues in the other battleground states.
Let me understand: Religious Freedoms in the US now trump personal freedoms as in "all men are created equal" What a mess that will become as Muslims fight to get their Koran based beliefs in public schools as well as Hindus and Buddhists who want their religious freedoms protected from fascist Christians who are the majority. Jehovah Witnesses will want the Pledge of Allegiance removed in schools because it threatens their religious freedoms. They believe they should only honour Jehovah, not any flag. Have fun with this battle
"You know, brethren, that a very large ship is benefited very much by a very small helm in the time of a storm, by being kept workways with the wind and the waves. Therefore, dearly beloved brethren, let us cheerfully do all things that lie in our power; and then may we stand still, with the utmost assurance, to see the salvation of God, and for his arm to be revealed." (Doctrine and Covenants of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Section 123: 16&17).
Don't worry. Be Happy.
John,
The operative word of "all men are created equal"
Is the word “CREATED”; not “equal.” The operative of "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable/inalienable rights" is “CREATOR;” not “rights.”
The source of our equalities and rights is what you need to be paying attention to because it defines intent. Absent a predefined intent the words "right" and "equal" can mean whatever you want them to mean - the same applies principle applies to the word marriage: the joining of opposites.
@ John,
"One nation under God." God is the source of our freedom.
"We have our freedom because of our faith; we do not have our faith because of our frredom."
G.W. Bush
John:
I am afraid you misunderstand. The Muslims re perfectly free to attempt to have their views incorporated into law, just as the Hindus, Buddhists, JW's, and yes, even the poor victims of same sex attraction disorder.
However, none of these efforts are guaranteed success under the Constitution.
For that, the acquiescence of a free and informed electorate is necessary.
Of course, the Hindu, the Buddhist, the Muslim, even the poor victims of same sex attraction disorder, are free to believe what they like, even if their beliefs should be rejected as normative in a free and fair electoral contest.
For example, the poor victims of same sex attraction disorder have tried to persuade their fellow citizens that marriage ought to be redefined so as to render it more in keeping with their beliefs.
In the attempt they have failed.
Hope this helps.
Freedom of belief or conscience *is* a personal freedom. It's in our Bill of Rights, which means it is a fundamental *individual* right.
It may be that Canadians do not believe that people have a right not to be forced to violate their own deeply held beliefs; or that even if they have such a right, it's of so little importance that any intended policy you happen to like, instantly outweighs it. However in the US, that is a minority opinion.
@Rick
With your myopic vision only events in USA count. Attempts have not failed in Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Israel, Mexico, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa and Spain where s-s marriage prevails. The UK is in the process of legislating s-s marriage. Let's blame these countries because (unlike the USA) they have embraced the metric system. Millions of people live in societies where s-s- marriage has triumphed. The USA is not the centre of the known Universe.
This is their best video yet to date.
In Baker v. Nelson the SCOTUS addressed the question of whether traditional marriage violated the 14th amendment and equal protection. They held there was no case there.
All men are created equal. Not all behaviors, however, must be treated equally. Muslims can practice their faith, but Sharia law cannot be forced on the nation without the consent of the governed. The courts have been looking at religious issues for a long time, and there are always difficult cases, but for the most part there is a good understanding of what the First Amendment means.
By calling the majority of Christians fascists, John McLaren is just showing his animus. This would not favorably impress the SCOTUS.
Most countries reject the recent redefinition of marriage and most of the world's population lives in those countries. In any event, other countries are not allowed to determine our laws. That is up to the people of this country.
@John McLaren
We have our freedom because of our faith!
>>Kalley Yanta explains what experts on what both sides of the marriage debate say will happen if marriage is redefined.
"... the volume of new litigation will be immense."
We needed "experts" to tell us this? Maybe some did, but I think for most of us it had already become self-evident.
Yep, this is one excellent MMM.
Hard-hitting, to the point, and truthful.
Many people are opposed to ssm for certain reasons and this kind of message simply reinforces their position.
But there are others who are apathetic. And all they need is to hear discussion of even the slightest negative effect of ssm for the proverbial switch will be flipped.
Great point, Ash. Many people are apathetic about the redefinition of marriage b/c they believe the lie, perpetuated by the opposition, that it won't have any direct affect on them. In other words, some don't care one way or the other b/c they don't know the truth.
The Marriage Minute series is great b/c it covers so many of the negative consequences of redefining marriage. These have ranged from faith-based arguments to secular arguments. The more you learn, the less likely you are to support marriage redefinition.
This is another excellent piece in the series.
This video makes me laugh so hard. The amendment is losing support almost daily. I can't wait for Minnesota to vote this poor discriminatory amendment down.
That's what SS"M" advocates said about Proposition 8 in California, Adam. And like them, you'll be eating your words.
Hypothetical: A law passes saying: "Marriage is defined as the union of two consenting adults"
How does this law, AS IT IS WRITTEN, with no extras, no "what ifs", or amendments of any kind, effect your life? Wait, stop. Keep reading. I said YOUR life. Not churches, business, or anyone else. How does the law granting same sex marraige directly impact YOUR life?
support for the amendment has gone down from 48% to 43% and opposition has risen from 44& to 49%. Also, opposition to the marriage amendment has raise almost 3 million more than supporters. And at least we have actual people donating money to defeat the amendment unlike your side, who has 2 or 3 anonymous donors who fuel hate and discrimination.
The polls showed the same downward trend against North Carolina's marriage amendment months before the vote, Adam. And more money was raised by SS"M" supporters to fight that amendment as well. Right before it passed with 61% of the vote. SS"M" supporters have always outspent opponents in every state that this has come to a vote, whether it be Maine, California, North Carolina, and yes, Minnesota - and always with the same result.
If there's one thing we can count on the left for, it is to overestimate the nation's support for SS"M".
How many referendums do you have to lose before you realize that most people don't want the values that support the natural family to be smeared as a human and civil rights abomination?
The thing is, Minnesota is different from North Carolina. Minnesota is not a southern state. And the marriage amendment poll has a majority against it unlike North Carolina. And do you honestly think you'll win in Minnesota, Washington, Maine, and Maryland this year? Odds are you're going to lose in 1 and maybe 2, and possible even all 4. I'm a Minnesota resident and I think we have a great chance to vote the amendment down.
California and Maine are not southern states either "Equality." And the polls there displayed a majority against natural marriage as well. The odds have always been against us, yet REAL marriage has always won out every time the people have been allowed to vote on this issue.
Regardless of what your skewed polls and the left biased main stream media mislead you into believing, I think that you will be very disappointed in the results of the coming election this November.
We will win all four, just as we have won the previous 33, Pseudo-equality.
You will then have another occasion to wonder why your polls led you astray.
Next.
If the definition of marriage changes, in the future, what is to stop one man or woman from "marrying" multiple adults? What is to stop in the future, a one to many relationship where 4 consenting adults want their employer to support all these members with health insurance because they are "married". Companies will no longer offer health insurance, and it will all be bigger government. This is going so far from what was originally intended for our country. Same sex marriage is wrong on so many levels.
"We will win all four, just as we have won the previous 33, Pseudo-equality.
You will then have another occasion to wonder why your polls led you astray.
Next."
Yep. Good luck with that. You're resources are going to be spread thin and we are going to be able to win a state or two or four (:
Let's see you say the same thing with a straight face after November, Adam.
Oh I think I will. Also, with that little loophole in Minnesota law where if you don't vote, it counts as a no is on our side. Last time I heard, that usually counts for 7% against the amendment. So we are at 56% against the amendment right now. (: