If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If she does, she will likely say that this is an issue that should be decided by ALL the voters via a constitutional amendement and that it is too important to be decided by only the legislators.
This post may contain an opinion that may conflict with your opinion. Do not take it personal. Polite discussion of difference of opinion is welcome.
Yes. Every state has laws that regulate the circumstances under which a couple is considered legally married, because of the many specific benefits that are applied to such a relationship.
I see Gov. Lingle is considering vetoing the civil unions bill. Good for her! It is always important that the country's most basic promise of equality under the law be shown to be empty bull, empty words, just another lie. Freedom of religion?, why no, you don't get to live by your own religious convictions, a bunch of irrelevant third parties and cults with a lot of money get to decide what religious views you live by. It worked so well in medeival Spain. Only the unusual need freedom, the rest of us all have our rights protected already, but as American justice system continually shows, the essence of crime is not necessarily harming people but merely of being different. Who knows? Maybe America will need gay peoples' help someday. I kind of think the kind of country stupid enough to fire 17 Arabic translators because they are gay, should. By all means, alienate potential friends. Would Hitler have lost WW2 if he hadn't driven out Jewish nuclear scientists? Nothing is more important than preserving hypocrisy.
I don't see your point. As you state, the goal is equality UNDER the law - not above it. It's the law that has priority, not equality. Apparently, you believe equality should be the higher goal, but that would directly contradict 'the country's most basic promise'.
That would have been a great argument to have used against interracial marriages a generation ago, or of Blacks actually being allowed to rent or buy where they could afford. "...with liberty and justice for the popular" just doesn't have the same majestic all inclusive patriotic ring to it somehow.
It all sounds so good on paper--the equal protection bit, the freedom of religion bit, the pursuit of happiness bit, real nice ideas but its supposed to be more than just hot air empty word slogans, its meant to be REAL. Whats wrong with pursuit of happiness? Whats wrong with people being happy?
hi,imoho,not being unkind only if it's vetoed,it would be nice since we wouldnt wish for the childern to learn that same gender person's are able to marry one another and this would teach the childern here incorrect thing's,marriage is sacred and it's between one gentleman and one lady.
i have a difficult time with narrow-minded people. Prejudice doesn't stop with US, it stops with our children. If we don't teach our children to be open minded, we will have to endure this stupidity forever.
"Democracy is the only system that persists in asking the powers that be whether they are the powers that ought to be."
– Sydney J. Harris
Comment