And this post has a lot of likes in a very short period of time:

 

Does anybody really care what I think about gay marriage? Didn't think so. I don't care for the trendy pink flags either. Reality is people don't really care where people stand on the subject. We are all going to stick to our morals either way. I'm all for standing up for yourself and your beliefs. Reality is these flags aren't going to change anything. For me the Bible said Adam+Eve not Adam+Steve. I think you're treading on really thin ice when you start changing the constitution to appease groups. End of the day it's not for me or anyone to judge. I've got straight friends I'd fight for and I've got gay friends I'd fight for. I love them both the same based on how they have treated me in life. I was raised that marriage is a bond between man+woman. Same time I've got enough problems + flaws that I'm not going to go attack certain groups based on what's in their heart. Doesn't mean I have to support it either. To each his own based on your value system IMO.

Agree or Disagree?

I think you're treading on really thin ice when you start changing the constitution

 

The Constitution addresses marriage?

The Constitution addresses marriage?

 

My whole point has been it doesn't address it. That is why it should be a state issue. I personally lean a little with this guy on how I personally feel. But at that same time the issue isn't important enough to me to say one way or the other where I stand. I'd support a canidate on either side of the issue because it isn't a deal breaker for me. My libertarian leanings tells me to get the gov't out of peoples lives. But at the same time my Libertarian side says why is the federal government in the business of marriage anyway? Let each state decide and how a state decides let the consequences or positives follow.

 

I'm not going to lose sleep if it passes or if it fails. I'm not going to protest for either side. But I'm not going to lie if it came to ballot or general election vote I'd struggle because it would be hard for me to vote for something that goes completley against how I was raised. But then I go back to the issue of why do I care what two people I don't know do.

 

LOL..........So in other words can we talk about Economics.

The Constitution addresses marriage?

 

I was just reposting this from Facebook, I didn't write it.

What I saw posted on Facebook:

 

"Gays have every right to be as miserable as I make my husband". :lol:

My whole point has been it doesn't address it. That is why it should be a state issue. I personally lean a little with this guy on how I personally feel. But at that same time the issue isn't important enough to me to say one way or the other where I stand. I'd support a canidate on either side of the issue because it isn't a deal breaker for me. My libertarian leanings tells me to get the gov't out of peoples lives. But at the same time my Libertarian side says why is the federal government in the business of marriage anyway? Let each state decide and how a state decides let the consequences or positives follow.

 

I'm not going to lose sleep if it passes or if it fails. I'm not going to protest for either side. But I'm not going to lie if it came to ballot or general election vote I'd struggle because it would be hard for me to vote for something that goes completley against how I was raised. But then I go back to the issue of why do I care what two people I don't know do.

 

LOL..........So in other words can we talk about Economics.

 

Then why the push to legislate it at all on any level?

Then why the push to legislate it at all on any level?

 

I think government should not be in the business of marriage. But I've always believed what isn't addressed in the constitution should be left to the states to legislate . Part of my problem with the Federal government is over the last 50-100 years they have taken on issues with authority not given to them or stretched granted authority over a much broader landscape.

What I saw posted on Facebook:

 

"Gays have every right to be as miserable as I make my husband". :lol:

 

I wish they would outlaw it for heterosexuals so my girlfriend quits mean mugging me.

So what is the deal anyways? I've hid a lot of people on Facebook so I guess I'm missing out. What's the story on gay marriage? Cliff notes version.

What about separation of marriage and state?

 

Let marriage be left to the churches and other religious institutions.

 

Private contracts at the state level.

Then why the push to legislate it at all on any level?

 

From my understanding anything that isn't specifically addressed in the constitution as federal responsibilities is delegated to the states to regulate/address by default. So in a sense, it should really be a state issue.

So what is the deal anyways? I've hid a lot of people on Facebook so I guess I'm missing out. What's the story on gay marriage? Cliff notes version.

SCOTUS has decided to hear arguments regarding the repeal of DOMA and the constitutionality of state laws such as California's prop 8.

 

If they decide to take it on, we will know their decision in June.

So what is the deal anyways? I've hid a lot of people on Facebook so I guess I'm missing out. What's the story on gay marriage? Cliff notes version.

 

The Supreme Court just finished hearing two cases on gay marriage. The first was on California's amendment to ban gay marriage in the state, which opponents have said violates the Equal Protection clause, and the one today was on the Defense of Marriage Act, which opponents have said the federal government doesn't have the power to define marriage.

 

Based on the questions from the Justices, it sounds like DOMA might not hold up, which would mean that same-sex couples wed in states that allow it will have their marriages recognized federally and will have to be recognized by other states that don't allow it. If California's amendment is overturned, that will be a much bigger deal, but it's less likely. That would effectively mean that no state can ban same-sex marriages.

The Supreme Court just finished hearing two cases on gay marriage. The first was on California's amendment to ban gay marriage in the state, which opponents have said violates the Equal Protection clause, and the one today was on the Defense of Marriage Act, which opponents have said the federal government doesn't have the power to define marriage.

 

Based on the questions from the Justices, it sounds like DOMA might not hold up, which would mean that same-sex couples wed in states that allow it will have their marriages recognized federally and will have to be recognized by other states that don't allow it. If California's amendment is overturned, that will be a much bigger deal, but it's less likely. That would effectively mean that no state can ban same-sex marriages.

I think defense of marriage act should be overturned because its a state issue. I'm confused why all states would have to recognize gay marriage from states that allow it. Individual states don't have to recognize ccw and other licenses from other states now? What in the law being struck down says other states must recognize ? Are you just talking about federal laws associated with spousal beneficiary laws according to property transfer ?