Comments on: Some Reasons for Optimism Regarding Same Sex Marriage

By: Carlos

Carlos — Tue, 30 May 2006 23:58:39 +0000

Being against or for Gay Marriage is only about and exclusively about rights, not religion, not morals, not conscience. Gay people do not want special rights, they want the same rights non-gay people have; and not granting them is plain and simple discriminatory. They want the right to marry another human being, not a goat or a dog as some have said this eventually will come down to… and in regards to those that believe marriage is a matter of a man and a woman… those need to think about the history of “unions”, where at first, it was all about everything else other than morals and religion… marraige was a trade, marriage was a way up to lineage, a way to preserve power… a many other things that are not RELIGION and BELIEFS. Religion was a part of marriage because it “blessed” the union, it celebrated it… civil unions, where religon is not involved are plain and simple a contract far from a commitment related to love. That there would be love, yes, that there would be commitment, yes, everything is possible. However, marriage, as known for most of the civilized world is a way to protect the uniting couple in ways far from the beliefs that those opposed to gay marraige insist it conveys.

By: RonF

RonF — Tue, 23 May 2006 20:48:03 +0000

I’d be interested to see a poll of politicians with the following questions:

1) Do you think that voting against SSM would cost you votes?
2) Do you think that voting for SSM would cost you votes?
3) Which position do you think will cost you more votes?

Will people who favor SSM vote against a politician who votes against it? Will people who disfavor SSM vote against a politician who votes for it? Which group is more likely to mobilize on the issue?

By: RonF

RonF — Tue, 23 May 2006 20:45:42 +0000

Actually, right now I’m against a Federal amendment banning gay “marriage”. But that’s conditional on the courts agreeing that this truly is a state issue, and that the “full faith and credit” clause of the Constitution does not require a state with a ban on SSM to be forced to accept an SSM solemnized in another state. If the courts decide that this is a Federal issue, then I’d have to support a Federal amendment.

By: brynn

brynn — Tue, 23 May 2006 20:09:52 +0000

Robert,

Maybe the timing was just wrong….

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 23 May 2006 14:56:46 +0000

We already tried that, Christopher. Y’all wouldn’t let us go.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 23 May 2006 11:46:46 +0000

Of course, RI is in New England.

Run a poll asking the same question in Red State Murika and the results would be reversed.

Is it too late to divide the USA into 2 parts? Maybe right along the Mason Dixon line? All the social fundies and move to Jesusland and the rest of us can live in the West and Northeast?

By: feminist blogs

feminist blogs — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Island voters who favor same-sex marriage: 45% (Source). Changing Demographics Are On The Side Of Equality Even two years ago, 15- to 25-year-olds favored gay marriage by 56 percent to 39 percent, according to a national survey by the University […]Continue reading at Alas, a blog … posted 7:36 am at Alas, a blog

By: FeministBlogosphere

FeministBlogosphere — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

05/23Some Reasons for Optimism Regarding Same Sex Marriage

By: Just Between Strangers

Just Between Strangers — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

[IMG wedding rings]Ampersand has an interesting theory about why anti-gay-marriage forces are in such a rush to get a federal law or other heavy duty smack-down for gay rights: becauseit won’t be long before theirs is the minority opinion, as younger voters with more tolerant viewpoints replace their older counterparts.Why is the leadership of the anti-equality movement so desparate to get marriage banned in the Constitution? Because they know that if they don’t win soon, and in a way