Same-sex Marriage.

[_Chap]

What does the propensity to make a decision have to do with the right to make it?

Even though this question may not have been on-topic, it caused no small stir, and thus deserves to be entertained.

Since it was asked generically, is it correct to conclude that it also applies to polygamy, polyandry, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and a host of fetishes?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I'll take the risk of trying to help here.

Look Wade. The question basically meant 'Supposing that only a few people wanted to do Action X. Why should that fact IN ITSELF ALONE have anything to do with whether people should have the right to do Action X if they wanted to?'

Obviously there might be all kinds of OTHER reasons for not allowing people to do Action X - it may very be cruel, bankrupt millions of innocent people, likely to lead to the extinction of life on Earth, and so on. Those may all be good reasons why Action X would not be made legal.

But the mere fact that not many people want to do Action X? Nah, that really isn't much of a reason IN ITSELF ALONE for not permitting those few that want to do Action X to go ahead and do it.

Clear now?

[_wenglund]

I'll take the risk of trying to help here.

Look Wade. The question basically meant 'Supposing that only a few people wanted to do Action X. Why should that fact IN ITSELF ALONE have anything to do with whether people should have the right to do Action X if they wanted to?'

Obviously there might be all kinds of OTHER reasons for not allowing people to do Action X - it may very be cruel, bankrupt millions of innocent people, likely to lead to the extinction of life on Earth, and so on. Those may all be good reasons why Action X would not be made legal.

But the mere fact that not many people want to do Action X? Nah, that really isn't much of a reason IN ITSELF ALONE for not permitting those few that want to do Action X to go ahead and do it.

Clear now?

So, is that your very long ways of answering "yes" to my question?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Chap]

What does the propensity to make a decision have to do with the right to make it?

Even though this question may not have been on-topic, it caused no small stir, and thus deserves to be entertained.

Since it was asked generically, is it correct to conclude that it also applies to polygamy, polyandry, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and a host of fetishes?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I'll take the risk of trying to help here.

Look Wade. The question basically meant 'Supposing that only a few people wanted to do Action X. Why should that fact IN ITSELF ALONE have anything to do with whether people should have the right to do Action X if they wanted to?'

Obviously there might be all kinds of OTHER reasons for not allowing people to do Action X - it may very be cruel, bankrupt millions of innocent people, likely to lead to the extinction of life on Earth, and so on. Those may all be good reasons why Action X would not be made legal.

But the mere fact that not many people want to do Action X? Nah, that really isn't much of a reason IN ITSELF ALONE for not permitting those few that want to do Action X to go ahead and do it.

Clear now?

So, is that your very long ways of answering "yes" to my question?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Shortly, no. It is a way of trying to help you to understand what other people are saying, which it is clear you either can't or won't do.

[_wenglund]

Shortly, no. It is a way of trying to help you to understand what other people are saying, which it is clear you either can't or won't do.

What is your short answer to my question?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Chap]

Shortly, no. It is a way of trying to help you to understand what other people are saying, which it is clear you either can't or won't do.

What is your short answer to my question?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Actually, you forgot to answer this one, which was the one I tried to explain to you:

What does the propensity to make a decision have to do with the right to make it?

[_wenglund]

Actually, you forgot to answer this one, which was the one I tried to explain to you:

What does the propensity to make a decision have to do with the right to make it?

My answer is: It depends upon the nature of the decision and the context in which the decision is made. If we are talking about matters of public policy; and if the public policies involve allocation of public resources; and assuming the policy makers are rational and wish to allocate resources so as to maximize happiness; then it would make sense to factor in propensity.

For example, when considering whether to provide government grant money to fund a school lunch program that gives the students free broccoli, it may prove wise to consider the propensity of the students to eat the broccoli. Said another way, before giving the students the right to choose free broccoli, it would make sense to consider their propensity to make that decision.

Now that I have answered this question, please answer mine.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Bazooka]

Wade, slightly off topic, what are your views on opposite sex marriage?
And on what basis, data, evidences etc are you basing those views?

Bump

[_Analytics]

For example, when considering whether to provide government grant money to fund a school lunch program that gives the students free broccoli, it may prove wise to consider the propensity of the students to eat the broccoli. Said another way, before giving the students the right to choose free broccoli, it would make sense to consider their propensity to make that decision.

What if a school gave whites free broccoli, but didn't give it to blacks. If somebody asked why, would it make sense to say, "Lots of white kids like broccoli, but I don't know if blacks do or not. So before giving blacks free broccoli too, the wise thing to do is consider the propensity of black students who would eat it."

Shelving for now the issue of whether that course of action would be "wise", it's hard to imagine the Supreme Court thinking such a course of action didn't violate the Equal Protection clause.

[_Daniel2]

For example, when considering whether to provide government grant money to fund a school lunch program that gives the students free broccoli, it may prove wise to consider the propensity of the students to eat the broccoli. Said another way, before giving the students the right to choose free broccoli, it would make sense to consider their propensity to make that decision.

What if a school gave whites free broccoli, but didn't give it to blacks. If somebody asked why, would it make sense to say, "Lots of white kids like broccoli, but I don't know if blacks do or not. So before giving blacks free broccoli too, the wise thing to do is consider the propensity of black students who would eat it."

Shelving for now the issue of whether that course of action would be "wise", it's hard to imagine the Supreme Court thinking such a course of action didn't violate the Equal Protection clause.

Great points.

Additionally, as a tangible commodity, food on a menu (i.e. broccoli) is finite, quantifiable and, as a school lunch option, may potentially be either under or over purchased.

Marriage, as an entity, is an intangible civil right and not subject to the law of supply and demand. There's no need to "ration" out civil marriages due to limited supplies. When it comes to civil marriage, the state never has either a shortage (not enough to give out) or a surplus (too many marriages that "go to waste" because they aren't being used).

The analogy is entirely irrelevant.

Daniel2

[_krose]

What does the propensity to make a decision have to do with the right to make it?

Since it was asked generically, is it correct to conclude that it also applies to polygamy, polyandry, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and a host of fetishes?

Since the question was whether people should be denied the right to choose an activity based on how many would actually choose to do it, of course! It applies to anything you could come up with.

The reason our society does not allow bestiality and pedophilia is NOT because we think not enough people would be interested in those activities to make the change "worthwhile."