tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21609676.post677034342712218203..comments2024-02-21T03:20:21.898-08:00Comments on An Inch At A Time: Reflections on the Journey: Statements on Marriage from Presidential CandidatesSUSAN RUSSELLhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01795717638621668638noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21609676.post-37013093602629831262008-05-21T09:02:00.000-07:002008-05-21T09:02:00.000-07:00Pseudo, the point is, and the Court discussed the ...Pseudo, the point is, and the Court discussed the issue at great length in its opinion, that civil unions and marriages did NOT carry the same legal rights or status in California. Therefore, the law limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples failed under California's due process and equal protection clauses. Far more than semantics were involved.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17547673802645392683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21609676.post-28961285545997464672008-05-21T07:52:00.000-07:002008-05-21T07:52:00.000-07:00Since the Constitution leaves marrage to the State...Since the Constitution leaves marrage to the States, that part is a non answer.<BR/>I'm sort of cold as to the idea that the President could "fix" any of this. Other than over turn DOMA (which niether Democratic candidate is willing to touch) there is precious little a president can do.<BR/>Now, ask me about what a President could do for Don't Ask Don't tell.Frair Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03855036304956508405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21609676.post-77649599079010504752008-05-20T23:35:00.000-07:002008-05-20T23:35:00.000-07:00Part of the push back should also include the poin...Part of the push back should also include the point that all ANYONE has is a "civil marriage," -- a contract between two people that makes them, in effect, a corporation in the eyes of the state.<BR/><BR/>The clergy presiding at a church wedding acts as an authorized agent of the state to witness the contract -- which is why the marriage contract is legally ended in the <I>civil</I> courts.<BR/><Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15648035289241014871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21609676.post-13073522203982277282008-05-20T13:51:00.000-07:002008-05-20T13:51:00.000-07:00I'd like to see more push-back on the "courts shou...I'd like to see more push-back on the "courts shouldn't legislate" canard. It needs to be said (again and again and again) that the people's legislature in California DID legislate on this: They approved a marriage bill. The Governator vetoed it. And that's how it wound up in court.Linda in VThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09819641132290227591noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21609676.post-13546059224920440722008-05-20T12:12:00.000-07:002008-05-20T12:12:00.000-07:00Seems to me either two are married with all the ri...Seems to me either two are married with all the rights and privileges that come with marriage or they aren't married and don't have those rights and privileges. The semantics are silly and devised to support prejudice.PseudoPiskiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12070541512355253553noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21609676.post-6841107213418839252008-05-20T11:22:00.000-07:002008-05-20T11:22:00.000-07:00I would describe these at best as "non-statements"...I would describe these at best as "non-statements".<BR/><BR/>I am in lvoe with this statement from the Prime Minister of Spain about their Parliament's passage of same-sex marriage legislation.<BR/><BR/>Since, unfortunately, neither of our remaining Democratic presidential candidates can openly embrace this historic moment in civil rights history, today is as good a day as any to reflect on the Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06728037041927734180noreply@blogger.com