The right's dangerous legal argument
Find a Conversation
The right's dangerous legal argument
| Thu, 03-05-2009 - 9:46pm |
Appearing for the supporters of Prop 8, Kenneth Starr, the former Whitewater prosecutor, said the people hold the right to modify the state constitution by adding or subtracting protections for civil rights.
Court appears ready to uphold Prop. 8
Full length fiction: worlds undone
"You have no power over my body..." ~ Anne Hutchinson
"You think you know, sir!" ~ Cornflake Girl ~ Tori Amos.

Pages
Actually, we don't have a precedent of "separate but equal".
Yes, it is about human rights.
And given that seperate but not equal has not worked in the past, it's silly to expend so much time trying to create something "close' when we already have an easy means to make civil rights equal.
What's in a name?
LOL.
Marriage, as a legal construct, is NOT a sacrament.
Providing equal access to civil rights does nothing to churches rights, or religious tradition, since no one is required to be married in a church--and no church is ever forced to perform a wedding.
Nice try.
And yet, some are calling for it again.
One would think we'd learn.
>>Does it need to be a (hands-on-hips) demand "everything/everyone" to be 'legally equal' in an all-in-one strike, and until that happens we'll wait (and keep talking here) for it to somehow happen?
Or might it
Not to mention, that even in the states where the term is marriage--the marriage for gays does not come with all of the same rights as the marriage for straight folks.
I don't think it will be much longer before this gets dealt with on a federal level, and then people will get over their need to hold onto "marriage" like they alone own it...
My grandkids, when they're born, will express disbelief that this country was every so backwards as to prevent equality to it's gay citizens.
>>Actually, we don't have a precedent of "separate but equal".
>>Not to mention, that even in the states where the term is marriage--the marriage for gays does not come with all of the same rights as the marriage for straight folks.<<
Because that marriage isn't recognized in other states, as a straight marriage performed by the same official on the same license is, and because the federal rights that come with staight marriage don't come with gay marriage??
The marriages are valid in those states only, (some other states will recognize them, but because they are not recognized on the federal level, they aren't portable like straight marriages are).
The gay couples cannot file joint federal taxes,
Pages