03-02-2004, 09:03 PM
Occhidiangela,
The General Welfare clause has been so widely interpreted (it's the justification for the entire Health and Human Services Department), it's beyond the scope of this thread. I personally don't believe that it covers marriage, but the point was made more for effect rather than substance. Although I would address one point you bring up.
"Hmm, promoting the general welfare? As in, a society with stable marriages is purported to be less turbulent than one without them? "
This may be true, and I believe most studies will show that children raised in stable two parent households do better than those without. Of course, that is not a rationale against same-sex marriage. It doesn't speak to children raised in two parent stable same-sex households. I've yet to see any evidence that a stable hetero marriage is superior to a stable same-sex marriage. Have you seen any?
The General Welfare clause has been so widely interpreted (it's the justification for the entire Health and Human Services Department), it's beyond the scope of this thread. I personally don't believe that it covers marriage, but the point was made more for effect rather than substance. Although I would address one point you bring up.
"Hmm, promoting the general welfare? As in, a society with stable marriages is purported to be less turbulent than one without them? "
This may be true, and I believe most studies will show that children raised in stable two parent households do better than those without. Of course, that is not a rationale against same-sex marriage. It doesn't speak to children raised in two parent stable same-sex households. I've yet to see any evidence that a stable hetero marriage is superior to a stable same-sex marriage. Have you seen any?