Amendment # 28 to ban Gay marriage!

I just read in the Newspaper today and it said that President Bush is going to try to have an amendment made to the constitution to Ban Gay marriage. I guess this is a response to the Massachusetts supreme court.... Although I am not Homosexual I think this is wrong.... They need to keep the religious beliefs out of our government and keep it free for everyone! Something like this has no business in the constitution.[This message has been edited by DC85, 02-11-2004]

I agree, and I'm leaning to the opinion that the government ought to get out of the marriage business altogether. Let the government confer civil unions and the churches confer marriage. So long as there is no legal distinction between unions and marriages I couldn't care less what the churches want to do. The government should not distinguish between gays and straights in granting civil unions. The churches can distinguish all they want in granting marriage.

Thats not a bad idea.... however I just got married and to me it symbolizes a commitment to her...... Just living her wouldn't do that. But maybe the word Married can only apply to religious marriage. Just something to binds to people and we get the same thing as marriage would be fine with me. Even if it means just signing a contract....

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then why not call it a duck? If a civil union represents all the same rights and privledges of marriage, why not call it marriage?Honestly I don't want to be from the generation who's legacy is the first constitutional amendment to take rights away from people.

Sigh...They always try to do this. Every single time Congress meets, they try this. It always fails.P.S. Welcome back DC85.

---

Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!

How come we can't ever get any of the fundies to defend this ridiculous amendment? Aren't fundy groups like the Focus on the Family group the major supporters here?Fundies: if the preservation of marriage is your goal (and it's a laudable one, to be sure), why not an amendment banning divorce? (Or at least banning joke marriages in Vegas?)

I don't either, I'm gay. I just think that if the word "marriage" is so damned sacred, then fine let's keep it sacred. Is government sacred? If so then perhaps the government has a role to play in deciding what qualifies as a sacred marriage. If not, I should think that would be better left to the churches, which seem to think they themselves are the best judges of what is and is not sacred.In other words, I see this ultimately as a question of church or state. Is the U.S. one big church, as medieval governments were? If it is then I think it perfectly appropriate that the U.S. government make the final decision as to what is and is not sacred in all matters. But if the U.S. is a state, apart from the church, then what business does it have sanctifying anything? It should simply grant the civil unions for all couples and let the churches decide which ones deserve the sacred title of "marriage".

I don't want to come off sounding like I'm jabbing at you so I'll clarify this as a genuine question from someone who knows nothing about the Gay lifestyle issues from the perspective of a Gay. I don't want to read any of the typical smart-assed bashing that I've come to observe on this forum from intollerant intellects who suppose they are more enlightened and therefore have the right to talk down to anyone not of their opinion.My honest question is, what is it about getting married or having a legal civil union recognized by the State, that the Gay community is finding it worth fighting for? From my perspective, the whole institution of marriage has evolved in the last 50 years in this country to where there are almost as many divorces as marriages. These statistics combined with the legal ties that go along with marriage have created a major headache in our society. I just don't understand why the Gay community would want to saddle themselves with the same burden instead of just co-habitating and being able to step back and laugh as the straight folk wind up back in court every time they change their formal partner.I can only think from an unfamiliar perspective that either the Gay marriages would be more stable and your divorce rates would be significantly lower than the straight community, along with tax benefits, but again, I'm not being facicious, just speculating. My other guess would be to achieve acceptance and parity with the straight community, but from the few people I know who are openly gay, they don't seem to be concerned about staight community opinion anymore. I am at a loss and welcome your own reason why the Gay community might want Gay marriage.

Amendment XIII
(1865)
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.Amendment XIV
(1868)
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.Amendment XV
(1870)
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.Amendment XIX
(1920)
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.Amendment XXVI
(1971)
The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age.AND NOWAmendment XXVIII
(2005)
Persons Of the same sex cannot be legally married.Doesn't seem to fit does it? however it seems they have alot of support to do this.......

Hi Lizard,I'm not answering from a gay perspective, but I find it pretty obvious. Marriage confers tax benefits, rights to insurance, rights to survivorship and next of kin status. All legal issues that would be important to a long term loving relationship.

---

Asgara
"An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato

I promise I won't bash you, lb. You partly answered your own question: tax benefits. There's also insurance considerations, survivor benefits, etc.But the most important thing is (again as you yourself mention) parity with the straight community. We're tired of being treated as second-class citizens. We're tired of having our lifestyle condemned by politically powerful morons who believe a book written thousands of years ago by only marginally civilized men is an acceptable standard by which to measure rightousness in all things. We're tired of hearing from these morons that our unions are not sacred because they don't conform to their interpretation of that same stupid book.This is simply a matter of fairness. The morons are no more valuable citizens of this nation than we are and we insist on being treated with equal dignity, if not by them then at least by the government that we, statistically, pay more to support.

I thought possibly the same, but are there not legal remedies that can do virtually the same thing, especially rights to surviorship that the Gay community could take advantage of without dancing with the ugly side of marriage - the possibility of divorce? I have watched a horrendous number of my fellow combatants in my unit go through and going through divorces and it is not something that I would wish on anyone. I think the Gay community has plenty of other areas that they could focus their energy on verses self distructing from the inside like what straight community marriage seems to be doing, at least in the military it is.

I can see the point about tax benefits. I got hammered this year and I have a wife and 2 carbon units replicas and we still owed.

isn't there also the thing about health care? if one is working and the other is not the one not working can't have the others health care Unless they cget married which they can't in most states and might not be able to at all soon.[This message has been edited by DC85, 02-11-2004]

That's still an issue, but not quite so much as it used to be. More and more companies are extending health benefits to partners of gay employees.