Debate: Does the Constitution require states to recognize same-sex marriage?

This April, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral arguments on one of the most monumental cases in our nation’s history, Obergefell v. Hodges, and their companion cases. The Heritage Foundation's Ryan T. Anderson headlines a debate on the questions presented before the Court.

[jonhouse]

Heathers problem is not gay marriage.
Her father never wanted any custodial rights
It's an abandonment issue
Same thing happens in hetero marriages when the father wants no custody rights
Something heathers father could have easily gotten ...but chose not to

[jonhouse]

Heathers problem is not with gay marriage, the problem lies with her father not wanting to be a part of her life.
He surely could of gotten some custody rights if he chose to...but he chose not to.
That same problem would occur if either parent in a hetero divorce dosent want any visitation or custody.

[bossmanham]

This lady, who has won cases in front of actual courts of law, has terrible arguments.

[PosthumousAddress]

The anti marriage equality arguments were so weak.

The story of Heather is puerile; is there any suggestion that allowing or not allowing her mother and partner to marry would have meant her father would be in her life?

During the time heather was a child, heterosexual marriage *was* the only form of marriage and yet her deadbeat dad still walked away. It had nothing to do with the form of marriage that is available to gay people.

Furthermore, has anyone ever demonstrated a logical basis for why excluding gay people from the institution of marriage will increase the likelihood that heterosexuals will marry? (based on the argument that the rational basis for discriminating against gay people is the alleged procreative heterosexual character of marriage)

[marclux]

The Heritage Foundation is not a proper neutral forum for a debate.  Let's see the recent one at Harvard.

[travismeeks]

This is what we have to be grateful for . We now have people that use general viewing for dismissal of thousands of voters and votes . These people have been different there whole lives and Need to feel accepted by the wrong crowed to feel a normality of gain so they dismiss the darkness and the depth of everything that isn’t even more comfortable than they’d prefer, so they have to get a better attention span than just a look or a nod or an observation of approval, these people are my specialty and they will be grateful for me one day and say it before me again and again and grateful for the best way possible you can make it work for me. Thanks again for your undying support and love to millions of people who voted and you gassed them with your own way of letting them down by letting yourself get into the demise of all your feelings and your worth and the other people who will take care of you nowhere t be seen. You’ve ran out your car for me and now you’re gonna weight me again and again knowing I kick your ass on every field . I am king shit and don’t need ya back for anything other than the people’s pulse . They’re all good people who love you still, but could usefully attend and allow themselves absence from your terrain and your obstacle of course. You are doing good things with your silence . Keep it up with your free air conditioning and your free dumb . Your Brian’s have been fun for us smarter people who have had fun the whole time with both of you and the weakest links because we see everything you do to hurt them and then moving forward with them again when they’ve done nothing to make you feel like you are threatened with him or her or whatever you are not grateful for . It ended up being a bitch test. Who’s the bitch and who willingly wants to stay here for me and my friends entertainment . I will not forgive nothing else but a change of behavior. So it is issued by TM. I’m trading my marks get set go. What’s your marks look like ? I want your sin! Now or knew you was gonna have to kneel.
I am a king now . Like my crowning. You helped make it possible. I’m sorry I’m just trying to figure out what exactly you are trying to prove . With out point access.

[GordonWayneWatts]

Q: "Does the Constitution require states to recognize same-sex marriage?" A: No, of course not; however, when we deny proper respect and human rights to gay citizens (which is wrong, morally), it makes it that much harder to defend the Biblical definition of marriage.

The liberals are intellectually dishonest when they claim that marriage must include 'Same Sex Marriage' in order to remedy some of their complaints, many of which are valid and legitimate.

However, we conservatives are also morally dishonest when we insist on denying gays on some matters where *they* are actually correct. (Conflating gay orientation with gay lifestyle is one example. Conflating gay marriage with gay adoption is yet another example.)



or:


We can do better - We must do better - We WILL do better - in time. (Will it be in our lifetime? I wonder...) //

PS: Feedback on the vid: Gay marriage hurts KIDS as it ((#1)) denies children of gender diversity in parents; and ((#2)) opens the door to polygamy and other ills under either Equal Protection or at least slippery slope.

Gordon Wayne Watts

[jacobthompson]

Not allowing LGBTQ people to marry violates the equal protection clause of the United States Constitution. Period. It is a legal question. Contrary to LGBTQ haters, it is a constitutional right. The government has no right to discriminate. Period.

[RReid-xceg]

Biased debate moderators are the best . . .