BS: On Same-Sex Marriages

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: Amos
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 10:36 AM

"Being stupid as a member of Congress is hardly a reason to be ridden on a rail from Washington. But Republican presidential campaigners are urging Mr. Craig to resign fast as a swift boat. One senator offered the ultimate rebuff between political pros by returning Mr. Craig's campaign donation.

Underlying the hurry to disown the senator, of course, is the party's brutal agenda of trumpeting the gay-marriage issue. To the extent Senator Craig, a stalwart in the family values caucus, might morph into a blatant hypocrite before the voters' eyes, he reflects on the party's record in demonizing homosexuality. The rush to cast him out betrays the party's intolerance, which is on display for the public in all of its ugliness. But it also betrays their political uneasiness as the next election approaches."

---

Me, I like the policy of tolerance.

A

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: Bee
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 10:35 AM

Same sex marriage is legal in Canada. No church is required to perform marriage ceremonies for anybody, gay or straight, and before (and still) anyone even thought of same sex marriage, churches of various sorts refused to perform marriage ceremonies for all kinds of people, the divorced, different religions, non-members, etc. That has not changed. The religious are not inconvenienced except in the case of their own particular sect/church/minister deciding to go against their personal wishes.

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 10:25 AM

Rapaire has just written the post I'd been going to write.

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: Rapparee
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 09:26 AM

My own opinion, which is worth what it costs you:

Permit a legal civil union, with all of the attendant tax and other benefits, for anyone who wants it. Define "marriage" as a religious ceremony that can be blessed by a Church or not, as the Church sees fit.

"Render unto Caesar" and all that.

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 08:57 AM

I'm aware of what it means, I'm just pointing out that homophobia is not the sole reason for objections, and I thought that Kendall's post was therefore misleading, and possibly denigrating of those who oppose it for religious reasons.
Just trying to be fair in other words.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: Bee
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 08:36 AM

Giok, the religious who hold to that tenet do not have to marry anyone of the same sex, nor do their pastors/priests/ministers have to perform the ceremonies. There are hundreds of religious tenets which do not make it into the civil laws because they are only important to those who practice that religion. Do we rail against the legal eating of pork? Do Orthodox Jews try to pass laws against pigs?

It is homophobia, which means fear.

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 08:22 AM

It's often a religious tenet Kendall, and not just homophobia.
G

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: kendall
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 07:32 AM

What are the homophobes afraid of?
No one told me who I could or couldn't marry, so where do they get that right?

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: Leadfingers
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 06:47 AM

Doing a Ceilidh at a Civil Union or Gay Wedding , has a totally different conception of 'Now swing the Other way' !

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: GUEST,PMB
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 03:59 AM

People who love each other are to be recognised as living together! Civilisation will collapse!

Subject: RE: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: TRUBRIT
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 01:07 AM

It's a shame that Atty Sarcone has nothing else to do to fill his time.....

Subject: BS: On Same-Sex Marriages
From: Amos
Date: 31 Aug 07 - 12:51 AM

Iowa judge approves gay weddings

(BBC News)

Same-sex couples are banned from marrying in 49 of the 50 US states
A county judge has struck down a ban on same-sex marriages in the US state of Iowa as unconstitutional.

Judge Robert Hanson ruled that a law allowing marriage only between men and women violated the rights of due process and equal protection.

Polk County Attorney John Sarcone said he would appeal against the ruling.

Only the state of Massachusetts allows gay marriages. Nine others - including New Jersey, New Hampshire, Connecticut and Vermont - offer civil unions.

Civil unions do not give gay couples the same legal rights as heterosexual marriages.

'Significant step'

The Iowa decision came after six gay couples sued Polk County in 2005 after it refused to give them marriage licences.

Judge Hanson ruled that the state's 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as solely between a man and a woman, violated the couples' constitutional rights.

He ordered county officials to issue licenses for the six couples as he made the ruling.

One of the couples' lawyers, Dennis Johnson, said the decision was: "A significant step forward in recognising the constitutional rights of all Iowans."

"And it's an amazing day for same-sex couples and their families all across Iowa," he said.

As soon as the decision was announced, Polk County attorney John Sarcone moved to prevent any same-sex couples from marrying until the appeal was decided.