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
The issue is
It's been supported, and it's part of our history.
Prior to desegregation-whites and blacks could BOTH got to school, just not the same school.
Fortunately, this comes down to a legal issue.
Religion is not required for the legal right to marry.
Marriage is not "only" defined as a union of a man and woman.
You're correct..thousands of years of history won't disappear.
But one would think we'd learn that oppression doesn't win. It didn't win with slavery, with prohibiting womens rights, with segregation, with banning inter racial marriages.
Many states already have bans against gay marriage, just as they had bans against interracial marriage.
Fearmongering led to using state constitutions for oppression.
But the Supreme court will end up deciding this, just as they have previously, and they'll decide NOT to support oppression.
They're not integral.
Would you care to show where religion is a legally required component of marriage in this country?
It isn't.
Pages