<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Your answer is non-responsive. Answer my question please.<br>
<br>
"So explain to me why, under your argument of the 14th Amendment,
polygamists and animal sodomists are not deserving of equal protection."<br>
<br>
I agree with your point. I can't agree with your logic. It fails.<br>
<br>
db<br>
<br>
Art Deco wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid00c601c528fa$e00a17a0$6401a8c0@opalpeakkiosk">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2604" name="GENERATOR">
<div><font size="4">You cannot be arguing seriously.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="4">If a man and a woman can enter a marriage
contract which insures the application/protection of certain civil
laws, the applying the language of the 14th Amendment below, then a man
and man or a woman and woman deserve the same protection of the laws.
Marriage is a legal, civil union in law. Pedestry is not.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="4"><br>
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<br>
<a href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</a><br>
</font></div>
<div>----- Original Message ----- </div>
<blockquote dir="ltr"
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0%; -moz-background-clip: initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: initial; -moz-background-origin: initial; font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>From:</b>
<a title="dave@davebudge.com" href="mailto:dave@davebudge.com">David
M. Budge</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>To:</b>
<a title="deco@moscow.com" href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">Art Deco</a>
</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Cc:</b>
<a title="vision2020@moscow.com" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">Vision
2020</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Sent:</b>
Monday, March 14, 2005 9:35 AM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Subject:</b>
Re: [Vision2020] California Gay-Marriage Ban Ruled Unconstitutional</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Sure I've read it. We can obviously take the implication to your point
to ridiculousness. Does a bigamist require equal protection, or
pedophiles, animal sodomists, or those who practice incest require the
same? The implications of morality are cause for public consensus.
That consensus thereby made under the legislative process of a
democratic republic. It does not hold to reason that we cannot
legislate morality. We do it all the time - murder, theft, child
abuse, spousal abuse, rape, incest, polygamy, pornography.... So
explain to me why, under your argument of the 14th Amendment,
polygamists and animal sodomists are not deserving of equal protection.<br>
<br>
So when the time comes, as now, that the good argument can be made
that the morality of homosexual partners fits the larger set of
morality of the public, laws should be passed, amended, or repealed.
If they are not, legislatures may, with the support of popular opinion,
change constitutions so the the rights that should be afforded will be
become constitutionally unattainable. Ergo - blowback. That is exactly
what the Federal Marriage Amendment is about. <br>
<br>
Listen, I'm pro gay marriage, as I've said. But the 14th Amendment
argument does not pass intellectual scrutiny. <br>
<br>
The proper argument is that these are good members of society that do
not harm others in their practices and do not threaten a deleterious
effect on society. They should be afforded the rights and privileges
that others have as to property succession and custodianship. Simple
as that.<br>
<br>
If, however, the government would get out of the marriage business this
would all become moot and spousal rights could be afforded in a
construct of contract law.<br>
<br>
db<br>
<br>
<br>
Art Deco wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid008d01c528ef$caba50f0$6401a8c0@opalpeakkiosk"
type="cite">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2604" name="GENERATOR">
<style></style>
<div><font size="4">David,</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div><font size="4">Have you not read the 14th Amendment to the
United States Constitution? I thought this amendment was one of the
cornerstones of libertarian philosophy.</font></div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<h4 class="nav"><font size="4">Amendment XIV</font></h4>
<p><EMP><font size="4"><font size="3">Section 1.</font></font></EMP><font
size="4"><font size="3"> All persons born or naturalized in the United
States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make
or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of
citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person
of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; <font
size="5"><strong>nor deny to<font size="6"> <font color="#0000ff">any
person</font></font> within its jurisdiction <font color="#0000ff"
size="6">the <font color="#ff0000">equal protection</font> of the laws</font></strong></font>...</font></font></p>
<p><font size="4"><br>
Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<br>
<a href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</a><br>
</font></p>
<p>--- Original Message ----- </p>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div
style="background: rgb(228, 228, 228) none repeat scroll 0% 50%; -moz-background-clip: initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: initial; -moz-background-origin: initial; font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>From:</b>
<a title="dave@davebudge.com" href="mailto:dave@davebudge.com">David
M. Budge</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>To:</b>
<a title="thansen@moscow.com" href="mailto:thansen@moscow.com">Tom
Hansen</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Cc:</b>
<a title="vision2020@moscow.com"
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Sent:</b>
Monday, March 14, 2005 7:20 AM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size-adjust: none;"><b>Subject:</b>
Re: [Vision2020] California Gay-Marriage Ban Ruled Unconstitutional</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Hail Machiavelli! But I warn all that think the ends justify the means
of the potential blow-back of judges over-ruling legislation may just
disable judges from doing just that. The CA statute that makes
marriage between one man and one woman is an issue of democracy by
legislation. Legislatures have the upper hand and can change
constitutions. Hence the notion of of "three equal legs of government"
is false. One's reliance on judicial interpretation may some day come
back and bite one on one's ass.<br>
<br>
Listen, I'm for love and equal rights. The libertarian in me says that
government should stay the hell out of the marriage business (to which
I have the concurrence of Nick Gier.) <br>
<br>
But just as the Supreme Court made unconstitutional the practice of
executing minors (the outcome with which I approve as I approve of the
outcome of the decision in question) the upshot is a loss of democracy
for residence of the states. Preferably the law should be changed by
democratic process. In other words, the day will likely come when a
law that you favor and is mandated by majority representation will be
overturned by judicial fiat. This is the wrong way to run a democracy
or a republic.<br>
<br>
Justice Brandies may be rolling over in his grave.<br>
<br>
db<br>
<br>
Tom Hansen wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid200503142119.j2ELJ6KN019334@mail-gw.fsr.net" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Alas! A reason to be proud to be from California.
It is a simple matter of equality. Nothing more, nothing less.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/14/gay.marriage.ap/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/14/gay.marriage.ap/index.html</a>
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
"What is objectionable, what is dangerous, about extremists is not that they
are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say
about their cause, but what they say about their opponents."
-- Robert F. Kennedy
_____________________________________________________
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
</pre>
</blockquote>
<hr> _____________________________________________________<br>
List services made available by First Step Internet, <br>
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////<br>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><hr width="90%" size="4">
_____________________________________________________
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
<hr width="90%" size="4">
_____________________________________________________
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a>
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>