"I wish they would only take me as I am" - Vincent Van Gogh               "How Can I believe in God when just last week I got my tounge caught in the roller of an electric typewriter?" - Woody Allen              "Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake" - Henry David Thoreau              "I took a speed reading course and read 'War and Peace' in twenty minutes. It involves Russia" - Woody Allen            "When promulgating esoteric cogitations, eschew platitudinous ponderosities" - Mark Rowan, my father            "Up, sluggard, and waste not life, for in the grave there will be sleep enough" - Benjamin Franklin             "What really interests me is whether God had any choice in the creation of the world." - Albert Einstein            "Welfare's purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence" - Ronald Reagan            "It's odd that you can get so anesthetized by your own pain or your own problem that you don't quite fully share the hell of someone close to you." - Lady Bird Johnson              "I still want to be the candidate for guys with confederate flags in their pickup truck" - Howard Dean

e-mail me

My Photo
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, United States

Graduate of the University of Oregon, Married for 4-1/2 years to my High School sweetheart. I am currently residing in Cleveland while I attend med school.

  • John McCain
    • Read what I feed

    Powered by Blogger

    Tuesday, June 06, 2006

    Gay Marriage Ban

    I realize that talk about a ban on gay marriage is supposed to get me - like all conservatives - fired up in support of the President. At least, that's how the media is portraying it (though Powerline shows why this isn't political posturing, like the MSM claims). But, it doesn't. In fact, it's not just apathy that I'm showing, I disagree with the President on the issue for two reasons.

    Primarily, I disagree with his position. The marriage of two men or two women threatens my marriage no more than their being gay threatens my heterosexuality. In fact, I would be willing to wager that most homosexual marriages are healthier and more loving that the train-wreck that occupied the White House in the late 90's.

    Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the issue does not require a constitutional amendment. Federalizing the issue, which Bush is doing, is contrary to traditional conservative principle. While I disagree with the position, if it is something that has potential supporters, it should be dealt with on a state-by-state basis, not as a federal constitutional amendment.


    Blogger AubreyJ said...

    I for one passed on posting about it... for now at least.

    When the elections get closer, this story might have some more punch to it... but as of now... old news.
    Good post though!!!

    8:44 PM  
    Blogger Ben A. Johnson said...

    You know Flynn... here in Massachusetts, gay marriage is legal... So if you did want to leave your wife and Benjamina... ;)

    8:55 PM  
    Anonymous jean-D said...

    I agree we don't have to resort to a Constitutional Amendment. But I also don't want the issue determined by judges.

    I am still undecided about gay marriage. If we allow gay marriage on the basis that people should have a right to marry whomever they wish, does it follow that polygamy should also be legal? I understand there are polygamy activists awaiting the outcome of gay marriage, to be next in line to agitate for a marriage right (to multiple partners).

    I also read an interview with a gay sex columnist in Canada, deluged with panicky letters from gays when he married his partner. They were afraid gay marriage would require sexual fidelity, among other quaint heterosexual notions. He assured them that he and his partner were not sexually exclusive, they still enjoyed plenty of sexual adventures, and gay marriage could mean whatever gays want it to mean. This lends credence to the argument that same-sex marriage could undermine the institution of marriage. Do gays really want to be able to make a serious, loving commitment, or do they want just another political win?

    Since gay marriage is not easily revoked once in place, I would like to see how it works in other places first before I sign on. Now that it's legal in Canada and Spain ... let's wait and see how it goes there.

    10:28 PM  
    Blogger prying1 said...

    The problem is a state by state issue. If one state says no and the next state over says yes then what happens when the happy couple get their license in one state and move to the next. Lawsuits will abbound.

    I also feel this is about definitions of words. If we allow one group do demand the definition of marraige be changed to include them the next group will want other key words defined to suit them.

    Law and the legal system would become meaningless.

    The homosexual community is being duped into thinking this is about and for them. It is not. It is for the ACLU and likeminded groups using the homosexual community to bring the U.S. one step closer to socialism.

    6:24 PM  
    Blogger T.L. Stanley said...

    If gay marriage is legal, will this mean we will see a rash of nasty custody disputes regarding who gets visitation rights to see the cats? Just a thought.
    Take care.

    3:19 AM  

    Post a Comment


    Links to this post:

    Create a Link

    << Home