January 25, 201214 yr I have to research him more. I have researched Ron Paul, and I like him, and only him at this point. I don't like politicians in general.
January 25, 201214 yr Isn't this basically a civil union? I'm a bit unlearned on this, but I was thinking that some are in favor of civil unions, which would provide said benefits without permitting a full-blown marriage. I might be wrong though. There are several downsides to "civil unions" -- including the problem of portability across state lines -- not to mention the cultural attachment to the word "marriage." As a sign I once saw in a protest photo said: "I didn't ask her to civil union me." Not to mention that if there's one governmentally-recognized institution for homosexuals and another governmentally-recognized institution of heterosexuals, then we really have to decide what we're doing here... The federal government's defining marriage seems like an insane proposition to me. If I were a strict constructionist with regard to the constitution, as a lot of conservatives tend to be, then I don't see how I could look at the Defense of Marriage Act and see anything but a MASSIVE Congressional overreach in violation of Tenth Amendment principles... but hey, it's never stopped Congress before...
January 25, 201214 yr Until they cap what you can spend on a campaign, it will always be this way. That would be a good topic for a separate thread, if there hasn't already been one. I'm not decided on the issue yet, but I've heard several suggestions on how to cap campaign spending.
January 25, 201214 yr God doesn't run our government...Yep, and you can sure tell to, but he does run Judgement Day.
January 25, 201214 yr It's not even on the list. It's pretty sad that so many people see it as an important issue IMO. This.
January 26, 201214 yr My only question to those that say it should be put on the ballot is if the libs lose will they accept the loss or like in California will they then challenge the will of the electorate in court? FWIW I could care less. I would vote against it but it really doesn't bother me one way or another. However I will be the first one here saying I told you so when polygamists want legal standing. Where is the harm in polygamy as long as no one is underage or being coerced?
January 26, 201214 yr There are several downsides to "civil unions" -- including the problem of portability across state lines -- not to mention the cultural attachment to the word "marriage." As a sign I once saw in a protest photo said: "I didn't ask her to civil union me." Not to mention that if there's one governmentally-recognized institution for homosexuals and another governmentally-recognized institution of heterosexuals, then we really have to decide what we're doing here... The federal government's defining marriage seems like an insane proposition to me. If I were a strict constructionist with regard to the constitution, as a lot of conservatives tend to be, then I don't see how I could look at the Defense of Marriage Act and see anything but a MASSIVE Congressional overreach in violation of Tenth Amendment principles... but hey, it's never stopped Congress before... That would just make them separate but equal...don't see any problem there...
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.