ANSWERS: 3
  • It was looking up there for a while on the west coast, but it got voted down in Cali, which was a letdown for the entire West Coast. It's up in Iowa and the Great Lakes region. Florida's still up in the air. Bible, Rust, and Farm Belts are still a big no. Oregon's still battling fiercely for it.
  • The debate over same sex marriage comes down to this. As cities and states across the US recognize civil unions, or in the case of San Francisco and Massachusetts, issue marriage licenses to gay couples, what was once an abstract, largely theoretical argument, now must be played out against a new reality. On the ground, and in real life, gay marriage exists. About this there can be no debate. Gay and lesbian couples are living as families, raising children, contributing to their communities, joining and even leading churches and synagogues, and in countless other ways, establishing their presence as valuable and respected members of society. While the opponents of gay marriage raise ever more passionate objections, the reality on the ground cannot and will not be reversed. To be sure, large numbers of Americans, probably a significant majority, continue to feel that gay marriage is somehow inappropriate, immoral, or just plain wrong. Still, the increasing visibility in our midst of family units headed up by openly gay couples alters the terms of the debate fundamentally. Now those who object find themselves in the awkward position of trying to attach words like "sinful," immoral," or "contrary to the will of God," to actual human beings living in actual families with lives as wonderful and complicated as their own. Beyond name calling, what can opponents of gay marriage offer? For one thing, of course, heterosexual couples can attempt to demonstrate by the persuasive power of their example that a traditional, loving relationship between "one man and one woman" is something to be admired. Set an example by being a positive, contributing presence in local communities, in churches, and in public life generally. If you think that the conventional model of marriage is to be preferred by future generations, prove it by demonstrating the constructive difference that such relationships can make on the ground where people can see what you are talking about. Sadly, I don't think the opponents of gay marriage are going to be satisfied by relying upon the power of persuasion. Rather, lacking confidence in their convictions, those opposed to gay marriage already speak about using force, in this case the force of law, in the form of a constitutional amendment. Here is the language of the amendment now being considered in Congress and in the White House. "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman; ... neither this [Constitution] nor the constitution of any state, nor state ... law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups." The language of the proposed amendment is rather obtuse; but the meaning is clear. Having defined marriage as the union of one man and one woman, the Constitution would then prohibit any "unmarried couples" from enjoying either the subjective privileges of "marriage" or any of its legal benefits. Even those who have entered into a "civil union" recognized by a city or state would, by the force of law, be denied all of the rights pertaining to marriage. Health insurance benefits, inheritance and property rights, even the privilege of visiting a loved one on his or her death bed in a hospital and making life or death decisions about medical treatment ... all of this would be denied by the full force and authority of the Constitution of the United States.
  • Truely amazing in this day and age that people would still use the bible as a weapon and justification to pass judgement on someone else. 42 years ago it was illegal for interracial marriages, they used bible quotes, irrational logic and it all boiled down to those Holyer than thou pointing fingers and feeling superior using the bible to mask their own ignorance. Today no one would dare publically use the bible to condem inter racial marriages, and it will be the same in the future for gay marriages; it just seems to take people a very long time to learn from their mistakes and apparently from their own history. “

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy