Comments on: Don’t Divorce Us http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/ A strong progressive voice in Lubbock, TX Mon, 21 May 2012 18:51:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: Danna http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9587 Danna Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:18:12 +0000 http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9587 Oops! That should have been mixed race marriages. Oops! That should have been mixed race marriages.

]]> By: Danna http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9586 Danna Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:17:13 +0000 http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9586 I believe it was the courts that overturned voters will when it came to raced mixed marriages (in the 50's maybe, and I believe that was in CA as well). I think it was necessary. The courts are a check on majority rule. I believe it was the courts that overturned voters will when it came to raced mixed marriages (in the 50’s maybe, and I believe that was in CA as well). I think it was necessary. The courts are a check on majority rule.

]]> By: Lubbock Left http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9580 Lubbock Left Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:52:57 +0000 http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9580 I agree on the bigger issue. Also, what's at question here is really 2 different questions -- (1) should people who had gay marriages before it became illegal be forcibly split, and (2) should prop 8 be overturned by the courts. I agree on the bigger issue.

Also, what’s at question here is really 2 different questions — (1) should people who had gay marriages before it became illegal be forcibly split, and (2) should prop 8 be overturned by the courts.

]]> By: Matt http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9578 Matt Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:40:03 +0000 http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9578 While I sympathize with the plight of Gay Rights from a purely "civic" standpoint, I don't think it's the California Supreme Court's place to overturn the will of the people, regardless of the people's ignorance in this matter. I think a lot of support could be garnered for civil unions under California law, and a lot of votes could be changed if they simply stopped calling it "marriage", per se, despite its essential sameness. The bigger issue here is that government (on all levels) shouldn't be involved in legislating and/or regulating marriage, and only the most circumspect argument regarding "the pursuit of happiness" would indicate otherwise. While I sympathize with the plight of Gay Rights from a purely “civic” standpoint, I don’t think it’s the California Supreme Court’s place to overturn the will of the people, regardless of the people’s ignorance in this matter. I think a lot of support could be garnered for civil unions under California law, and a lot of votes could be changed if they simply stopped calling it “marriage”, per se, despite its essential sameness.

The bigger issue here is that government (on all levels) shouldn’t be involved in legislating and/or regulating marriage, and only the most circumspect argument regarding “the pursuit of happiness” would indicate otherwise.

]]> By: Don’t Divorce Us | America For Purchase http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9550 Don’t Divorce Us | America For Purchase Tue, 10 Feb 2009 19:21:01 +0000 http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9550 [...] Don’t Divorce Us - A few friends have pointed out this video from the Courage Campaign as an example of very effective advocacy against marriage discrimination in California. Check it out: [...] […] Don’t Divorce Us - A few friends have pointed out this video from the Courage Campaign as an example of very effective advocacy against marriage discrimination in California. Check it out: […]

]]> By: Danna http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9548 Danna Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:43:42 +0000 http://lubbockleft.com/2009/02/10/dont-divorce-us/#comment-9548 Very nice video! Very nice video!

]]>