181
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 31:
Line 31: + +
Debate:Should the federal government have the power to define marriage? (view source)
Revision as of 19:15, May 21, 2008
, 19:15, May 21, 2008→NO: should limit itself to enforcing contracts
In cases like this, the burden of proof is on those who want to define and legislate marriage at the federal level, and the question they need to answer is this: "What is the compelling justification for this ''not'' to be handled at the state & local level, and who is harmed if it's not federal? --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 14:06, 21 May 2008 (EDT)
In cases like this, the burden of proof is on those who want to define and legislate marriage at the federal level, and the question they need to answer is this: "What is the compelling justification for this ''not'' to be handled at the state & local level, and who is harmed if it's not federal? --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 14:06, 21 May 2008 (EDT)
To argue for something
To argue for something
The government should not have the power to define marriage. Marriage should not be taken into consideration when filling taxes, suing for wrongful death, inheritance, hospital visitation, or immigration. The laws against polygamy, polyandry, adultery should removed from the books. The government should instead limit itself to enforcing contracts between (two or more) people. Once the government says "you two people get this benefit because you are married", it is in the business of defining marriage. --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 15:15, 21 May 2008 (EDT)