July 15, 200422 yr Surprised no one has mentioned this yet....probably I'm one of the few awake :lol I havent read articles, just talked with my dad about it, so I dont know a lot of facts yet...I hear McCain was big in shutting it down.... something about it being up to the states :thumbup
July 15, 200422 yr McCain has to be the only Republican I can get myself to admire... There is a man with principles.
July 15, 200422 yr Author because he was for letting the states decide? That sounds damn conservative to me.
July 15, 200422 yr Author i dont know a lot of what he votes for (and cant look it up till later), but I'm glad he voted how he did on the federal gay marriage ban...
July 15, 200422 yr Look at what he votes for and why else would Kerry consider him? 459151[/snapback] McCain is nothing but a real Republican. He is pro-life, for fiscal responsibility and for small government... If that is a Democrat, then he is welcomed in our party. :mischief
July 15, 200422 yr seriously, I hope the GOP keeps harping on this issue right up to the election. keep it up guys! :lol
July 15, 200422 yr Good. We don't need a chrisitan principle (don't give me this Leviticus crap because it isn't followed too much except in Chasidic Jews) in our Constitution.
July 15, 200422 yr Author Good. We don't need a chrisitan principle (don't give me this Leviticus crap because it isn't followed too much except in Chasidic Jews) in our Constitution. 459502[/snapback] it has nothing to do with religion. When states decide, it might have to do with religion...but this, in my mind and McCain's, is about states deciding.
July 15, 200422 yr Good. We don't need a chrisitan principle (don't give me this Leviticus crap because it isn't followed too much except in Chasidic Jews) in our Constitution. 459502[/snapback] it has nothing to do with religion. When states decide, it might have to do with religion...but this, in my mind and McCain's, is about states deciding. 459519[/snapback] The whole idea is based on religion. Don't shy away from it.
July 15, 200422 yr Author banning gay marriage at the state level? yes. banning gay marriage at a federal level? States rights.
July 15, 200422 yr banning gay marriage at the state level? yes. banning gay marriage at a federal level? States rights. 459547[/snapback] W/e Furman. Go back to your confederate club now aight?
July 15, 200422 yr Author what does "Confederate club" have to do with anything? :blink: McCain (from Arizona...not the Southeast) like a good conservative feels that one of the checks and balances of this great nation is giving power to the states.
July 15, 200422 yr what does "Confederate club" have to do with anything? :blink: McCain (from Arizona...not the Southeast) like a good conservative feels that one of the checks and balances of this great nation is giving power to the states. 459587[/snapback] Totally agree
July 15, 200422 yr Of course it has to do with religion. That's the whole reason that Bush believes gays should be banned from marrying. This decision needs to be left up to the states. I don't want another amendment in the constitution restricting something again. You might remember the last amendment to restrict the rights of Americans, the 18th Amendment, better known as Prohibition. That didn't exactly last long.
July 15, 200422 yr Of course it has to do with religion. That's the whole reason that Bush believes gays should be banned from marrying. This decision needs to be left up to the states. I don't want another amendment in the constitution restricting something again. You might remember the last amendment to restrict the rights of Americans, the 18th Amendment, better known as Prohibition. That didn't exactly last long. 459600[/snapback] The gay marriage debate obviously has to do with religion (Judeo-christian), but whether an amendment should be added to the constitutuion is a states rights vs. federal issue, clearly. In fact thats the reason conservatives voted against it, b/c they feel its up to the states.
July 15, 200422 yr Which hole people decide to use in the bedroom isn't a federal issue. Good call by McCain and co.
July 16, 200422 yr I am for the amendment. Once one state grants the right to gay marriage, all other states must see that union and acknowledge it. That is how someone who is 15 can drive with his license in a state where you must be 16 to get a license. It is in the constitution, that is why we need the amendment. This is not an issue of state's rights.
July 16, 200422 yr Author that's plain idiocy Cape. So, if Florida doesn't allow gay marriage and Mass. does....gay couples from Mass. who move to FL don't have their marriage recognized.
July 16, 200422 yr that's plain idiocy Cape. So, if Florida doesn't allow gay marriage and Mass. does....gay couples from Mass. who move to FL don't have their marriage recognized. 459998[/snapback] But if they maintain residence in Mass. legally, they must be seen as a married couple by a 50 states.
July 16, 200422 yr Author what does "seeing them as married" entitle? Saying "oh those gay dudes are married" or does it mean giving them tax breaks....because if they maintain Mass. residence, then tax breaks in FL are no issue for them.
July 16, 200422 yr legally, they must be seen as a married couple by a 50 states. No, that's what the Defense of Marriage Act supposedly protects against. That's why I asked about the constitutional status of DOMA. Is it being challenged in any circuit?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.