[Vision2020] Gay amendment

Thu Jun 8 09:27:00 PDT 2006

Ok, now I see where you are coming from.  What you say makes perfect sense to me now and I agree.  Thanks -Tom

Joe Campbell <joekc at adelphia.net> wrote:  No, Tom, I'm not saying that. I'm a legal minimalist: the fewer laws the better; the fewer changes to the constitution the better. Laws should be used to prevent clear harms to clear persons and nothing else. But there are plenty of laws on the books now that go much further and I'd like to see them abolished. I think that there are deeper social problems that will not be fixed by merely failing to pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

--
Joe Campbell

---- Tom Ivie wrote: 

=============
Joe, 
So then, are you saying that there needs to be a Constitutional Amendment that is in favor of gay marriage? I am fairly new to this topic, but it seems reasonable to me that some of the issues you suggest, ie hospital visits, etc., could be argued using the 14th Amendment. That is not to say that they haven't already, because I just am not very informed on this topic. -Tom

Joe Campbell wrote:
In a perfect world, your view would be fine. But the world is not perfect. Currently straights have rights that gays and lesbians do not have, e.g., the right to marry the adult person of his or her choice. With this right comes others, from hospital visitation to adoption of children to insurance claims. The question then is, What is the best and easiest way to correct the disparity?

--
Joe Campbell

---- Tom Ivie wrote: 

=============
I'm just curious enough to ask how the members of v2020 stand on this particular issue and "why". Not because of George or any particular political party. Then it would be interesting to see how the opinions stack up between us by party. Although some of us are not beholden to any particular party, we might lean one way or the other politically (or not). 

For myself, I don't think there needs to be a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage. On the other side of the coin, however, I don't think there needs to be a Constitutional Amendment to say that it is legal. Marriage is not a "legal" thing. Marriage is a religious thing. You can have a legal "union" without a "marriage". So are we mixing religion and politics by doing an Amendment? In my opinion, yes. I don't think that religion should be forced upon people. It should be by choice. I find it extremely hypocritical that every state will enforce a divorce decree unilaterally but will not recognize legal "unions" unilaterally. 

How does that Van Halen song go (Sammy Hagar era)? "I want the best of both worlds"

For the record, I consider myself a left leaning conservative / right leaning liberal (call me what you want).

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060608/fbfcc068/attachment-0001.htm