Comments on: Love Wins

By: Jamie

Jamie — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 02:10:27 +0000

I just want to congratulate all the new husbands and wives and let them know that I, a straight married person, am doing all I can to change hearts and minds of those I know so that some day soon every person has the chance to marry his or her loving partner. It is a complete outrage that this basic civil liberty does not yet exist.

Blessings and best wishes to you all!

By: Brooks

Brooks — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:59:22 +0000

“matters of…justice should not be subject to popular vote”

Bingo, that’s why I referenced Loving v. Virginia in my initial comment upthread and linked to the Wikipedia entry. Whenever I hear that stupid argument about majority preference I ask if the person would say the same about interracial marriage. Of course, they respond with either some diversionary non-response response or they say that race is different because “race isn’t a choice, but homosexuality is (or at least homosexual behavior and relationships)”. I respond that, even if we leave aside legitimate challenges to their premise, religion is a choice, as is political party affiliation, etc. — so should majority preference prevail if the majority wanted to exclude from legally-recognized marriage Jewish couples or inter-religious couples or Repblican/conservative couples or Democratic/liberal couples? ok, actually I don’t bother asking social conservatives about that last group…wouldn’t want to get an enthusiastic “You betcha!”

But as anyone interested can see by the example I provide via link in my other comment, it’s impossible to have a rational, logical discussion with opponents of marriage equality on this issue because they will consistently either evade questions (often responding with the mere pretense of an actual answer, via straw man, non sequitur, etc.) or will shift to some other, equally indefensible argument. And they do this because their arguments are all just fronts for their real rationale: to ensure that government continues to implicitly confirm and impose their religious doctrine by denying equal rights to same-sex couples.

By: The Liberty Papers »Blog Archive » Quote Of The Day

The Liberty Papers »Blog Archive » Quote Of The Day — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:14:32 +0000

[...] Donald Marron: I often tell my students that, in my humble opinion, one purpose of government is to help people [...]

By: echo

echo — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 15:44:21 +0000

This is indeed all about government lessening its presence.

If gays would like to marry and priests or other authorities would marry them, who is the government to stand in the way of their personal and spiritual choices?

To the cynical comment about love or lust, I’d point out that more conservative areas have far higher rates of teen pregnancy and divorce. Such a comment would better be directed towards the couples consisting of the self-professed devout.

By: Brandie K.

Brandie K. — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 17:32:01 +0000

Jane, this “will of the people” argument is getting old. To those who want a referendum on whether or not gay couples deserve marriage equality, I say matters of fairness and justice should not be subject to popular vote.

Let’s look at another social fight over the rules of marriage.

When the CA Supreme Court legalized interracial marriage in 1948, 90% of Americans opposed it. By 1958, the number had increased and 94% of Americans disapproved of marriages between interracial couples. In 1967, when the U.S. Supreme Court legalized marriage equality for interracial couples on a nationwide level, 72% still opposed it. It wasn’t until 1994 that these people were in the minority for the first time with 41% opposing and 45% approving.

Thank God we have a constitution and other branches of government to set us right when we make mistakes.

Sources:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/28417/most-americans-approve-interracial-marriages.aspx
1948 figure from Gail Mathabane, “Gays face same battle interracial couples fought,” USA Today, 2004-JAN-25.

By: mikeplainfield

mikeplainfield — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 14:57:15 +0000

I am tired of hearing the phrase “will of the people” or “let us vote.” The only people that should be allowed to vote on this are the people that it affects. Let the same sex couples vote on whether or not they should make marriage for them a govt institution. Don’t let straight couples decide that. That would go against the very core principles of our constitution. A majority group should never decide what a minority group can and can’t do. If we left it up to a “will of the people” vote, then women would not be able to vote, blacks would still be slaves, and asians would not be able to marry US citizens. These things were all voted on, and lost. The court system is designed under the constitution to protect these small groups of people. People always say that when the courts don’t go their way, they were a bunch of activist judges. In truth, they are doing their jobs… to protect the minorities from majority rule. Anyone, or any law that keeps a small group of people at bay, is demonstrating discrimination, pure and simple.

By: Jane

Jane — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 14:48:03 +0000

Was it love that won or politicians bought by money and not reflecting the will of the people.

By: Brooks

Brooks — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 17:51:46 +0000

Well said, Richard.

By: Richard A. Walter

Richard A. Walter — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 17:02:38 +0000

The same can be asked of straight couples, but it is not. How about we stop with the double standards here, and get the government out of everybody’s bedrooms once and for all. True conservatives do NOT want Big Brother in our bedrooms and in our homes, and yet by fighting against marriage equality, they are actually KEEPING our government in their own bedrooms as well as ours.

By: Richard A. Walter

Richard A. Walter — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 17:00:41 +0000

@JB. There are also other economic considerations that you are either overlooking due to lack of knowledge, or that you are ignoring intentionally. By granting marriage equality, the following economic benefits will occur:
1) Savings in government expense through having fewer tax returns to process, since more couples who are married in fact would also then be married in the legal sense and able to file joint returns
2) Fewer children on welfare due to the stability of more couples who are allowed to marry and place those children on their insurance coverage
3) More homes that would be purchased since more couples would have more money to purchase homes with
4) More weddings mean more work fo florists, caterers, formal wear shops, photographers, and wedding planners, gift registries, hairstylists, et al.
5) More money to invest in the communities we live in since we would not be shelling out exorbitant amounts of filing fees and lawyers’ fees to gain the same rights and protections for our families that different-gendered couples are granted with a $20-$30 marriage license. In my area, for my husband and I to have the same protections that a male-female married couple ge for a $25 marriage license, just the filing fees for all the paperwork would cost us in excess of $15,000. And that is if we download the forms from the legal websites (which entails other fees) and file them ourselves. And lawyers average about $150 an hour to complete the paperwork, and the lowest quote we have gotten so far would average about another $25,000 for the lawyer. THis is money we could spend with local merchants who would then invest in other community merchants and stimulate the economy in our area better than a lawyer sending his or her children out of state to college.