Gay Marriage, The Flaming Debate, Leadership By Example
Read more articles on Politics and Relationships.May 21, 2008
Posted by neillevine
May 21, 2008
Posted by neillevine
82 Views
Gay marriage is back in the political spotlight because California’s top court ruled that same sex unions can be legally binding in that jurisdiction. The state Constitution does not currently forbid the practice, that people have a right to enter into a gay marriage, under the theory of equal rights.
California, as a result, joints Massachusetts as the only two states to currently recognize gay marriage. On the other hand, twenty-seven states have constitutional amendments specifically banning the practice, although it is legal to co-habit, live together, and even receive some benefits under such a living arrangement
So what is the problem? Apparently, people are not supposed to be gay and they are not supposed to you know and they are not supposed. But they do. And they want to and they want legal protection.
The court ruling and the fairly certain placement of an amendment on the ballot in the upcoming election to ban gay marriage are sure to engender a great debate and get out the vote. For some people this is very serious. This gets into everyone’s civil and constitutional rights since it could have an impact on other laws and even court rulings from what can and can not be done, what is legitimate and what can be inherited and so on.
I want to point out there is a lot of double talk on sex out there in politico land. Here in New York, we have a number of philanderers including a Republican Congressman who apparently has two families. New York also has a playboy governor. There appear to be plenty of drunks and worse in Albany. There are politicians elsewhere who appear to lack what are commonly referred to as morals. The point being that why limit the debate to gay marriage and why not legally frown on moral turpitude.
Unfortunately, the current atmosphere is woman do not have to cooperate at all as exemplified by Hillary Clinton and Silda Wall Spitzer and sex is outrageous anyway so why should anyone be entitled ed to go at it. The Speaker of the New York State Assembly as a side offering appears willing to shield perpetrators of far more dangerous crimes by not allowing the collection of DNA samples to match evidence from crime scenes with actual violators. Nor is there much of any effort to use the internet to prevent crime. Of course, this is being kept pretty quiet. But the debate on sex should really rouse the public in any case. As Barack Obama has shown, it is possible to shake down the political opposition in this way as he has done to Hillary Clinton. Yet be very comfortable in bed with Ted Kennedy, whose long record is well known. Talk about political hypocrisy. Remember Larry Craig is gay and would not qualify for gay marriage. I doubt Barney Frank qualifies either. Imagine any serious effort to pass a law that would oust morally unfit elected officials. Had the FBI been required to investigate, I would assume New York and New Jersey never would have been embarrassed byJames McGreevey and Eliot Spitzer. But there are many politicians who like the frat house atmosphere they revel in.
I submit this is all political double talk for the purpose of providing political fun and games during a long election season.
Copyright © 2006
Terms & Conditions
