Originally posted by jammerCalifornia's legislature is elected, so the voters, who you claim are against gay marriage, voted for legislators who support it as shown by the legislature's action in passing the law. Your "no" to the first question is wrong, unless you concede that the voters no longer (if they ever did) oppose gay marriage.
both
Originally posted by sasquatch672Neither. Both simply increase the number of marriages and that's more revenue to balance the budget!!
I don't care. It doesn't affect my life one bit. I care about a balanced budget, a fair tax plan, good schools, health care, and national security. I couldn't give a rat's ass if two people who want to be together go to a church to get married.
Do you really think "gay marriage" is a big threat to marriage? Which threat to marriage is bigger - gay marriage or the 50% divorce rate in our country?
There do seem to be two issues with regard to gay marriage, one more “out there” in the public debate, and one more “in the closet,” so to speak.
The “out-there” one is the religious/moral question. It really seems to be some churches lobbying the government to tell other churches (or any religious groups) what they can and cannot do regarding what they view as a “sacred” institution. I really can’t get my brain around that one. It really does violate the freedom of religion principle.
The other issue goes to widget’s comment about property rights: communal spousal property, spousal Social Security benefits, dependent health-insurance coverage, etc. Now, it would seem that the state (and the body politic) certainly has a legitimate interest here. But the “solutions” would likely be more practical and administrative than ideological (hopefully), and certainly don’t appear to be insurmountable. Perhaps that’s why this side of the issue is not the main focus of debate.
I think gay couples should be allowed to marry; and I agree with Sasquatch.
Originally posted by no1marauderMy bad!
So the voters who are against gay marriage elected representatives who support it???? Do you believe that ALL laws should be passed by popular referundum and we should do away with the legislature?
You're right .. I stand corrected.
..............
Two seperate questions:
1. "So the voters who are against gay marriage elected representatives who support it????"
........
Many of them .. yes. Few, if any, were elected on this single issue though. California, like many States, is very Liberal within the large Cities .. San Francisco and L.A. Most of us don't see it as a big issue ... others do. Personally I don't care who's sleeping with who; it just doesn't effect me one way or the other. If it comes up on a ballot, I'd vote no myself. I'm an traditionalist on this issue. Like many of you I have gay friends and even gay family members. Even they are split on this issue, most for, some against. It's not a big issue to me, as I say, I don't care who's "doing" who if i'm not doing them myself. Other peoples sex lives don't interest me very much. I don't judge gays as good/evil .. not my job.
.....
2. "Do you believe that ALL laws should be passed by popular referundum and we should do away with the legislature?"
....
No, of course not. But when the legislature attempts an end-run around the populus .. we'll usually slap them back into reality.
............
The Democratic Party is imploding IMO .. and it's not good for America at all. We need a strong alternative to the Republican point of view IMO .. we just don't have one right now. The Democrat Party has become the Party of special interests, many of which are at odds with each other. They've become disfunctional and out of touch with mainstream American values.
Originally posted by no1marauderNope , I'm not mistaken...what I posted is word for word from the San Diego Union-Tribune. Obiviously your "article" is op-ed.
You are mistaken. As stated in the article, Proposition 22 was a vote against recognizing gay marriages performed in other states and countries that was passed 5 years ago. That vote itself says nothing about whether the majority of Californians NOW or THEN supported allowing gay couples to marry inside the state of California.
Originally posted by xsLooking at the wording of the Proposition the MSN article is mistaken and I apologize for the error. However, the vote on Proposition 22 was taken five years ago and polls show a significant shifting of public attitude on the issue in the time. Massachusetts gay couples have been getting married for a year and a half now and the sky has not fallen. In any event, you never addressed my central point: isn't it right wingers who always complain about courts usurping the legislature's function? Yet here the Governor is saying he's going to veto the legislature's actions because the decision should be left to the courts! The legislature's decision is presumably reflecting the will of the people NOW in a republic; shouldn't you right wingers be screaming that the legislature's will should be done??
Nope , I'm not mistaken...what I posted is word for word from the San Diego Union-Tribune. Obiviously your "article" is op-ed.