Today’s issues are gay rights and marriage equity. As I have asked in most every post about gay
rights and marriage equality, where is the harm?
Government is tasked to protect its citizens. That means making murder, stealing, assault
and other actions like them illegal. All
those listed as well as many more not listed and the variants of each, hurt
people in some way. It can’t be shown in
any way how being gay hurts anyone.
To make it illegal for a same sex couple to get married is
placing their action in the same category as those that commit one of the other
crimes listed above. There is absolutely
no rationalization for it.
Governor Romney has stated very clearly that he will not
support gay marriage. Members of the
party he belongs to have tried for many years to pass a constitutional
amendment that would prevent states from enacting laws that would permit
marriage equity. The party also, in the
house and the senate teamed with a republican president, passed the Defense of
Marriage Act (odd name for legislation that restricted marriage instead of
expanding the rights of marriage to more citizens). The courts have struck down the act, but
those in supported of the act are fighting it to keep on the books. It is believed that Romney working with his
party would set back the quest for gay rights and marriage equity many years.
Obama on the other hand has come out in support of gay
rights and supports marriage equity, although he said he would leave it to the
states. When the Defense of Marriage Act
was declared unconstitutional by the courts, he refused to defend it, an action
that let the court’s decision stand. The
house, controlled by Republicans, is now taken up arms in defense of the
act.
For gay rights and
marriage equity, Obama receives the Responsible Community’s support.
Morris,
ReplyDeleteGays are looking for "special" rights that don't apply to them now. A marriage is defined as contract between a man and woman, so same sex people do not qualify. End of story. Why should a company be forced to give special privileges to couples who do not qualify for these rights? It is just another example of how government is regulating the private sector to death. If a private company wishes to offer these benefits to gay couples, then I'm OK with that, but they should not be forced, at the point of a gun (the only way government knows how to enforce unconstitutional laws), to provide these benefits. Truthfully, government should NOT be in the business of issuing marriage licenses. They should be banned, and allow marriages to be between a couple and their church. It is completely irresponsible for Obama-in-theif or the future Mittens-in-theif to push this agenda one way or another.
Johnny Galt, Why is marriage only for a man and a woman? Is it becuase of tradition or culture? There are a lot of things that at one time were in place because of tradition or culture. Whites and blacks were not allowed to marry, Sunday had blue laws and divorce was not allowed. Yet, those ideas fell away and the world hasn't ended.
ReplyDeleteAs for companies "being forced" to provide "special privileges" to people that haven't earned them, these aren't special privileges, they are basic human rights. It has nothing to do with government.
Finally, government has the task of being a record keeper of events and relationships in the economy. They maintain the land records, they keep track of licensed people to perform certain kinds of work and should keep track of long term relationship such as marriage.
Thank you, Hilda. I appreciate your comments.
ReplyDelete