November 10, 2008
Virginia vs. Loving and Gay Marriage
Ah . . . someone has finally
brought up Virginia v. Loving in the "gay marriage" debate. That case has definitely been on my mind.
Ultimately, however, I just don't see the analogy as being that strong in the real world: the Lovings were burst in on in the middle of the night in their bedroom in the good-old-boy version of a SWAT-style raid.
Perhaps I am ill-informed, but how often are gay couples separated by force in that manner?
I mean, naturally I see the theoretical link, but those who claim that they are prevented from "being with the person they love" have to be aware that no such thing is happening. I believe the argument boils down to Federal benefits in most cases, and hospital visitation in a handful of states. And a word.
This is not nothing—but neither is it anything like what the Lovings were up against.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
04:20 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 163 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Perhaps I am ill-informed, but how often are gay couples separated by force in that manner?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas
Posted by: Christophe at November 10, 2008 09:05 PM (2rBIo)
2
Not applicable, Christophe.
Posted by: Attila Girl at November 11, 2008 02:52 AM (TpmQk)
3
The good ol' boys burst in on the parties in
Lawrence in their bedroom, and arrested them. I'm not sure what's not applicable.
Posted by: Christophe at November 11, 2008 10:58 AM (2rBIo)
4
Race is a biological myth. Melanin level is equivalent to pigmentation levels in eyes or hair.
The sexes are different.
Posted by: Darleen at November 11, 2008 03:29 PM (Hto/+)
5
The racists' objection to interracial marriage was precisely because it was a marriage, with all that it implied, in every meaning of the word. Did anybody go around saying that the Lovings' marriage "wasn't really a marriage?"
On the other hand, many people hold the notion that marriage, by definition, requires one man and one woman, and they are not keen on changing the meaning of a term that has served society well as long as written records have been kept, in order to satisfy a minority element.
Posted by: John at November 12, 2008 04:31 AM (rxb8j)
6
It turns out that LvT is comparable to the Loving case only by contrast. In LvT, the arresting officer did not go to the residence of the men involved in order to arrest them for the sex they were having, but on an entirely unrelated matter, and finding no grounds to arrest them on the original matter, arrested them for the conduct which he witnessed.
On the other hand, the cops making the arrest in the Loving case went there for the specific purpose of enforcing the law against miscegenation.
Posted by: John at November 13, 2008 05:02 AM (e73ze)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
26kb generated in CPU 0.0196, elapsed 0.1898 seconds.
209 queries taking 0.1791 seconds, 463 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
