Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Nullification of Committment?
This video clip poignantly points out why the same sex marriages performed in California prior to the passage of Prop 8 should stand:
http://www.couragecampaign.org/Divorce
And then there are the legal reasons--the 14th amendment of our constitution for instance established equality before the law, nullifying the States' rights to nullification of certain federal laws based on religious grounds (oh, and there is that pesky 1st amendment right of freedom for/from religion).
For those who see an "out" of this dilemma with civil unions: first off, all marriages are civil unions--you all have heard that phrase "by the powers invested in me by the state of _____I now pronounce you (married)." The government grants many many privileges, rights and responsibilities to married couples (the Government Accounting Office counted 1049 when the Defense of Marriage Act was enacted --1996. Since then an additional 120 benefits or rights can be added to that list). Second, is the concept of "separate but equal"--we all know that separate is NOT equal.
But as I have said before, who one loves and commits to, as long as it is mutual should not get others' shorts up in a knot.
[That marriage as an institution needs to be examined, is yet another issue. But, perhaps same sex marriage does help rock the patriarchal love boat, at least a bit.]
http://www.couragecampaign.org/Divorce
And then there are the legal reasons--the 14th amendment of our constitution for instance established equality before the law, nullifying the States' rights to nullification of certain federal laws based on religious grounds (oh, and there is that pesky 1st amendment right of freedom for/from religion).
For those who see an "out" of this dilemma with civil unions: first off, all marriages are civil unions--you all have heard that phrase "by the powers invested in me by the state of _____I now pronounce you (married)." The government grants many many privileges, rights and responsibilities to married couples (the Government Accounting Office counted 1049 when the Defense of Marriage Act was enacted --1996. Since then an additional 120 benefits or rights can be added to that list). Second, is the concept of "separate but equal"--we all know that separate is NOT equal.
But as I have said before, who one loves and commits to, as long as it is mutual should not get others' shorts up in a knot.
[That marriage as an institution needs to be examined, is yet another issue. But, perhaps same sex marriage does help rock the patriarchal love boat, at least a bit.]
Labels: Prop, same sex marriage
