That's the attitude Andrew Sullivan takes on his Time magazine blog regarding the advancing possibility of same-sex marriage riht coming to a vote in Massachusetts. I agree with his feeling that there is enough popular support and gathering evidence that same-sex marriage has NOT destroyed society to allow Massachusetts to become the first state to vote in favor of that right.
If that clears the legislature and makes it onto the ballot, the vote won't happen until November, 2008. There will doubtlessly be a LOT more said and written about this issue in the interim, but Sullivan's column isn't a bad place to start.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I've been finding myself getting quite cynical about all this. I mean, a couple thousand of the petitions were shown to be false, yet the state refused to investigate. That fact never seemed to have been part of the debate. So what other illegal methods do the bigots have ready?
ReplyDeleteI'm not covinced that this amendment can pass a consecutive session of congress, let alone win by popular vote.
ReplyDeletePaul.
pdcook.blogspot.com
The point is not whether or not the amendment will pass. The point is that civil rights are never to be put to a vote of the majority! If that were the case, we'd still have legalized segregation in the U.S. LGBT people must have the same civil (and sacramental) rights as any other citizen, regardless of whether or not the dominant group agrees.
ReplyDelete