Banning Gay Marriage @ MindSay

   

Related tags

 

   


 

   
So..We'll give you your term "marriage"..but it won't be enough-will it?
For you see, I KNOW the depths of loathing in humans..I've experienced it first-hand..

ensuring that gay people won't be able to use the term marriage will not be enough for those who will push(part of their doctrine) to put their God before my "life, liberty, and the pursuit of (my) happiness"

The corollary to the First Amendment is that I have the "freedom" to be free FROM religion..


but it won't be enough..will it..?
 
 
   
 

grr.
i really, really, REALLY hate the fact that gay marriage isn't legal everywhere in the US yet.
I mean,
The US government maintained a ban on interracial marriage until 1967. The Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court Case ended all race based legal restrictions against marriage.
(from http://maineview.blogspot.com/2009/04/sunday-editorial-on-editorials.html) 

it really burns me up. it's the same arguments that were used to stop interracial marriage. minus the whole inferiority thing. But the Bible quotes, the "unnatural" quality of it...yeah, it's been said before.

honestly, who gives two fucks if two people decide to marry? let them handle their own business thank you very much. it doesn't fucking involve you, grow up.

oh, and the part about it not being natural? how many things in your life are truly natural right now? hm? not that piece of shit car you're driving, nor almost ANYTHING you use in a day...why don't you go in a forest for a while and really live "naturally" and the way god intended. then you can tell people they're not natural.

but, my guess is by then you'll realize there are much more important things to worry about.
 
 
 

   
Bigots Win In California


Homophobes celebrating their bigtory on the occasion of the successful ban on gay marriage in California.

-Andrew Austin
 
 
   
 

Gay Marriage BANNED in CA - Prop 8 Passed
08 - Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry

YES: 5,220,694 52.2%

NO: 4,792,873 47.8%

Source: http://vote.sos.ca.gov/props/index.html
 
 
 

   
A win for Personal Sovereignty
(from the Advocate)

Connecticut Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage

The Connecticut supreme court Friday issued a 4-3 decision in favor of eight gay couples who were the plaintiffs in Kerrigan and Mock v. the Connecticut Department of Public Health, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage in the state. Connecticut will now become the third state in the country behind Massachusetts and California where gay couples are allowed equal access to marriage. As in California and Massachusetts, out-of-state couples will be eligible to marry in Connecticut. 

The court found that it was unconstitutional to deny marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples and that civil unions, which are available in the state, were an unequal institution. "We conclude that, in light of the history of pernicious discrimination faced by gay men and lesbians, and because the institution of marriage carries with it a status and significance that the newly created classification of civil unions does not embody, the segregation of heterosexual and homosexual couples into separate institutions constitutes a cognizable harm," Justice Richard N. Palmer wrote for the majority.

The final paragraph of the decision charged that the equal protection of gays and lesbians must be prioritized over traditional views of the institution of marriage:  "...our conventional understanding of marriage must yield to a more contemporary appreciation of the rights entitled to constitutional protection. Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay persons are entitled to marry the otherwise qualified same sex partner of their choice. To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others. The guarantee of equal protection under the law, and our obligation to uphold that command, forbids us from doing so. In accordance with these state constitutional requirements, same sex couples cannot be denied the freedom to marry."

Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders filed the case in 2004 on behalf of eight same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses in Madison, Conn. The couples had been in committed relationships ranging from 10 to 30 years, with many of them raising children. The defendant, the state's Department of Public Health, oversees the registration of all Connecticut's marriages.

In June of 2006, Judge Patty Jenkins Pittman ruled that excluding same-sex couples from marital rights did not violate the Connecticut constitution, at which point the plaintiffs appealed the decision to the state supreme court.

Oral arguments for the case took place in May of 2007. “Separate institutions for different classes of citizens are now unheard of anywhere in American jurisprudence,” GLAD senior attorney Ben Klein told the high court.  “Our history has taught us that separation serves no other purpose than to mark a class of citizens as inferior.” (The Advocate)

 
 
   
 

Showing 1 - 5.   [ Next ]
 
Latest Comment
Re: 41 UNBECOMING BUDDHIST -

Read...


 
© 2005-2007 MindSay Interactive LLC
| Terms of Service
| Privacy Policy
My Account
Inbox
Account Settings
Lost Password?
Logout
Blog
Update Blog
Edit Old Entries
Pick a Theme
Customize Design
Modify Plugins
Community
Your Profile
Wiki Pages
MindSay Tags
Video & Photos
Geographic Directory
Inside MindSay
About MindSay
MindSay and RSS
Report Spam
Contact Us
Help