Comments on: Palin Breaks With McCain By Favoring Federal Ban On Gay Marriage

By: fbr

fbr — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:14:13 +0000

VeggieTart, yes. And my point was that any ceremonies by any Church should have no legal standing. Further my point was that the government should not be entering into any contracts with couples, only individuals. How couples (or triples, or whatever) decide to share their lives is a private matter, not a matter for a state. Sure it might be more complicated legally, but also more flexible and would stop politicians like Palin imposing their religious views on people.

By: VeggieTart

VeggieTart — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 14:38:36 +0000

fbr, no one is saying a church would have to preside over one of these ceremonies–after all, a clergyperson would be well within his/her rights to refuse to officiate for someone who didn’t belong to that church or who didn’t share his/her beliefs. And there are churches that will perform commitment ceremonies of same-sex couples; sadly, they don’t have the legal standing they deserve.

The problem with a contract is it would involve all sorts of legal hoops to jump through. When a man and woman get married, there is a sort of contract between the government and the couple with regard to rights; same-sex couples should be able to get these same rights conferred upon them far more easily than drawing up a private contract.

By: fbr

fbr — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:20:20 +0000

Why should the state have any say in marriage at all?

The religious, spiritual and ritualistic aspects should be left to whatever religious organization the parties happen to belong to – if they happen to belong to one. Faiths may accept a union between whatever combination of consenting adults they wish.

The legal aspects of marriage, sharing of rights and responsibilities between the parties, can be arranged by a private contract between the parties. Any rights and responsibilities that stem from laws that the states enact should be between the state and an individual, not between the state and a married couple.

By: kyleSF

kyleSF — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:08:08 +0000

I don’t want to put down any deeply religious people here but is Sarah Palin living in the dark ages? It’s freaking 2008! And why would anyone wish to deny two consenting adults the rights everyone else has? If anything including more diversity would only strengthen the term “family.” I live in California just 45 minutes away from San Francisco and I see so many Yes on Prop 8 stickers it’s disgusting. The proponents of the measure are getting by persuading unintelligent citizens by using fraudulent claims like “churchs will not be allowed to retain their tax status” and “they will teach about gays in schools.” Sorry but I highly doubt that, and even if they did, would that be such a big problem? Perhaps teaching about diversity to the young will help stop bigotry in the future.

Unfortunately, I have the feeling that the proposition is going to pass. But that’s okay, next year we’ll have another go at giving equal rights to EVERYONE.

By: Emily

Emily — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:02:55 +0000

I don’t understand her. And every time she opens her mouth I understand her less.