Constitutional ban on same sex marriages?

[Taxman]

Wow, it was bad enough when Bush stated support for such a thing in his State of the Union address. This is just ridiculous. Oh well, not like it'll ever happen.

[Utah]

At least Bush and Co are favoring/following a course of action that follows the law.

As I have said before, I am pro gay marriage. However, I am just disgusted by the actions of many in the gay rights movement. We are a nation of laws and we need to follow those laws. If you want something changed then do it right.

Also, those in the gay rights community are doing tremendous damge to themselves. Too bad, especially given all the progress they have made over the last 15 years or so.

[Taxman]

[ QUOTE ]
We are a nation of laws and we need to follow those laws. If you want something changed then do it right.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is the problem I have with many "pro life" groups. I just think it's absurd to voice support for a constitutional ban. The constitution was not made for determining the morality of things. I disagree with local statutes against gay marriage, but I deal with them. I am apalled however by the idea of taking such things into the constitution.

[stripsqueez]

[ QUOTE ]
At least Bush and Co are favoring/following a course of action that follows the law.

As I have said before, I am pro gay marriage. However, I am just disgusted by the actions of many in the gay rights movement. We are a nation of laws and we need to follow those laws. If you want something changed then do it right.

Also, those in the gay rights community are doing tremendous damge to themselves. Too bad, especially given all the progress they have made over the last 15 years or so.


[/ QUOTE ]

what crap ! - in summary you are pro gay marriage but you think its wrong how gay people go about effecting change - how can that be right ?

why should gay people continue to be discriminated against by the law ? - your saying that they should for as long as it takes for them to convince the very system that is screwing them to change !! - getting discriminatory laws changed is not often done by polite politics

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[ThaSaltCracka]

well one man forcing his will on an entire city doesn't seem fair either. Its a two way street remember, just because you like what the mayor is doing, that does not mean it is right or legal.

We were talking about the Mass. court a while back, and my main problem was that judges shoudl not be creating laws from the bench. It goes against the checks and balances system of the U.S. government. What the mayor is doing is BREAKING the law, he's not even trying to make one, he's BREAKING it, that is the distinction here, and that is even worse than if the mayor had created a law.

[Taxman]

I don't think the mayor was imposing his will on anyone. His decision doesn't really affect the naysayers except to morally outrage them. Legally speaking what he did was wrong, but a lot of legally questionable things have had to been done to ensure the recognition of the idea that all men are in fact created equal. I am glad he did what he did, but don't mistake me, I can certainly see your point.

[stripsqueez]

[ QUOTE ]
that does not mean it is right or legal

[/ QUOTE ]

its not right that gay people are discriminated against - the rest of what you are talking about is procedural

i understand the rule of law but being a lawyer i also understand that the law often operates in an unfair or capricious way - at the end of the day who is being hurt by gay people taking the action they are ?

stripsqueez - chickenhawk

[ThaSaltCracka]

heres my bottom line [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img],
I don't know or have heard a singel person who opposes civil unions for gays, IMO civil unions solve all legal aspects associated w/ marriage, or atleast they should.
Most people in America, want the institution of Marriage to be between a man and a woman. You have to atl east respect that opinion.
soooo...... IMO we can kill to birds with one stone, so to speak, annnddd... allow civil unions.

often operates in an unfair or capricious way
I wouldn't say often, on occasion it does, however most times it does in a way that adversley affects people or a group, ie. stiffer drug penalties which adversley affect inner city people.

I will say that I completely understand what you guys are saying that change sometimes comes by a law being broken. Martin Luther King is a great example, however MLK had to take the punishment associated with breaking the law, regardless of how racist or biased that law was. And it was indeed racist.

I will give GWB some credit, atleast he is trying to "solve" this "problem" democratlly via congress, rather then an executive order, which essentially the mayor of SF is doing.

[Taxman]

[ QUOTE ]
atleast he is trying to "solve" this "problem" democratlly via congress, rather then an executive order, which essentially the mayor of SF is doing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah becasuse that would go over really well. I'm with you on the civil union thing. Why should gay couples been seen any differently that hetero couples, in the eyes of the law? The law doesn't care if gay people are immoral, it just cares about who gets the house when the couple breaks up and who has the right to make medical decisions when one person is comatose.

[stripsqueez]

[ QUOTE ]
I will give GWB some credit, atleast he is trying to "solve" this "problem" democratlly via congress, rather then an executive order, which essentially the mayor of SF is doing

[/ QUOTE ]

sigh - george bush was not trying to solve the problem when i heard him talk crap about how there should not be gay marriage - if george bush was trying to solve the problem he would speak the truth not what he figures voters want to hear - he would do what he could to institute change and a decent fair society for all people in the country he is president of

in my country we recognise same sex couples - have done for years - that doesnt solve the problem - in the US you have 2 sorts of legally recognised personal relationships - marriage - not married - the discrimination that same sex couples face as a result of discriminatory laws is much greater and more ingrained than you realise

stripsqueez - chickenhawk