Wednesday, July 14, 2004


The Senate has rejected the President's proposal to make an amendment to the Constitution banning gay marriage. I'm not sure about all the legalese involved in this but I think everybody, no matter what their sexual orientation, has the right to be happy, and I dont think their should be laws against it. Why shouldnt a gay couple have the right to get married and enjoy the same privelages as a straight couple? I know everybody's got an opinion on this one, I'd like to hear ya in the comments.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

(dp)My stance has been and always will be that the government needs to keep their stinky hands off of marriage - that defining it as including this set or that is JUST as exclusionary as what Bush was proposing. Government should not define marriage - it's not what government is for. That means that government can't say gay marriages aren't allowed, nor can government say that gay marriages ARE allowed.

Don't take my word for it though. I can't say it any better than the man who says it best - Michael Badnarik (2004 Libertarian Presidential Candidate). I don't agree with him on all issues, ESPECIALLY the war, but on this he's got it spot on:

"When government permission is granted, the marriage constitutes a legal, binding contract, with terms that vary over time and with the location of residence. Since these terms are not written down, but are simply a matter of case law and creative legal tactics, a couple rarely finds out what they are until faced with a divorce. Men discover that their claim to custody can be prejudiced simply by their sex. Women find that that their worth as a homemaker varies from state to state. Prenuptial agreements are honored by some courts and heavily discounted by others. The couples find themselves bound, not by what they themselves have agreed upon, but by what government officials dictate.

Like every partnership, marriage should fit the individuals it unites, rather than be a "one-size-fits all" proposition defined by those outside the relationship. Each marriage should be what the partners want it to be—no more, no less. Ideally, the terms of marriage should be defined ahead of time with procedures to modify them as necessary.

Just as anyone can engage in a business relationship, any individuals should be able to enter into a marriage. Government's role in a business partnership is to simply enforce, not dictate, its terms. Government's role in marriage should be the same.

When marriage is taken out of the legal realm, it is seen for what it has always been: a matter of heart and soul. Just as the Catholic Church has historically disdained divorce among its congregation, so too will some religious groups refuse to bless gay unions. Both those who support and those who condemn gay marriage will be free to practice their beliefs and persuade others to their way of thinking. Each individual will be free to choose. Isn't that what America's all about? "

And that's all I've got to say about that. ;)

4:25 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home