Gay Marriage Amendment

Wednesday, July 14, 2004
The proposed amendment that would effectively ban gay marriage died on the floor of the senate today. Apparently, enough of the Senate Republicans decided they were not going to vote for it and so they did not get the numbers they needed for the amendment to move on.

Two thoughts on the matter.

When I first read the article the first thing I thought to myself was that these Republicans only decided to not vote in favor of it because they would not want to be known in the future as people who wanted to discriminate against homosexuals. I believe that as soon as my generation gets a little older homosexuality will become more widely accepted. Maybe its naive on my part but I just feel that my generation is a lot more tolerant than those that came before me. So, instead of making the same mistakes as those during the civil rights era most Republicans have decided to skirt around the issue rather than voting for what they really believe is right. While I'm very glad that they voted this way I can't say I agree with the means by which they arrived at the decision. As leaders, I expect them to vote their beliefs and conscience. If they really believe homosexuality is bad, then they should probably vote that way. Is it cynical for me to believe that they only voted the way they did because they just want to curry favor in the future?

Second thought, are Americans really this dumb? Bill Frist said, "Will activist judges not elected by the American people destroy the institution of marriage, or will the people protect marriage as the best way to raise children? My vote is with the people."

No crap they weren't elected by the people. That's the whole point of the judicial system. Anybody who has taken a course in American Government knows something about checks and balances. The reason that the Supreme Court has life time appointments is to ensure that they do not feel the pressure of being voted in. They make rulings with absolute certainty that their job is not on the line. They do not curry favor to the majority at the sake of the minority. But Senator Frist phrases it in such a way that makes it appear as if something is wrong with the system. WRONG! That is why the system works. But are Americans dumb enough to buy whatever a politician tells him so long as he uses the right language?


Kat said...

i think the repubs knew it wouldn't pass. i think they did it to bring that topic into the presidential race, to highlight the difference between bush (opposes gay marriage) and kerry (approves of civil unions as legally binding for all).

susan said...

My concern is that people think they have a right to impose their perception of "moral" on others. In fact I think that is the whole point. I don't care if someone thinks homosexuality is "wrong" and I would never force them to be homosexual but for them to get up on their podium and tell others what is "wrong" just annoys me to no end. Then they try to claim that homosexuality will destroy the fabric of this country. What crap! Homosexuality has been around forever and will be around until eternity. Pretending it doesn't exist or denying civil rights to people who are homosexual is outrageous. And I don't care if churches want to deny marriage to homosexuals - that is their right. But trying to make those religious opinions part of our constitution is terrible.

Jen said...

Wait a minute Susan. You mean that the liberal menace didn't invent homosexuality in the Clinton administration?

xosweetxpeaxo89 said...

the constitution clearly states that maraige(in this country at least) is between a man and woman. not two of the same its not all about religion