Local Politics - Maryland
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-02-2012, 07:42 AM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
(15-02-2012 06:55 AM)Jeff Wrote:  
(15-02-2012 05:59 AM)morondog Wrote:  your fears seemed far-fetched.

Do you have experience in matrimonial law or family court to know what issues there may be? I do not.

Do the people proposing changes owe it to their fellow citizens to study the matter and provide the opinions of experts? I say yes.

I'm a conservative (but obviously not a religious conservative). To most of you liberals the word "conservative" is a punchline. To me it means to change things carefully. Don't jump from here to there without having thought through what happens "there." Liberals advocate faster change (let's have a word government, that will solve all of our problems!) , with a "what could go wrong?" attitude. I don't thing that's smart.

On most issues there are the 20% emotionally-charged people on each side of it. In the so-called middle are the people who don't see a clear choice they can endorse, but who are able to be persuaded by a case of reason. Make that case and your issue succeeds. For gay marriage, equal rights is part but not all of the case.

Hmm. Well, you are correct that I am no expert. Perhaps I am one of the emotionally charged ones. I concede that you have taken a reasonable position which I attacked without thought.

I will say that garriage seems to me to be at least as loopy a solution as simply letting marriage rights extend to same sex couples. Sure, there could be problems, but insurmountable ones?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2012, 12:05 PM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
(15-02-2012 06:55 AM)Jeff Wrote:  Do you have experience in matrimonial law or family court to know what issues there may be? I do not.

Do the people proposing changes owe it to their fellow citizens to study the matter and provide the opinions of experts? I say yes.

I'm a conservative (but obviously not a religious conservative). To most of you liberals the word "conservative" is a punchline. To me it means to change things carefully. Don't jump from here to there without having thought through what happens "there." Liberals advocate faster change (let's have a word government, that will solve all of our problems!) , with a "what could go wrong?" attitude. I don't thing that's smart.

On most issues there are the 20% emotionally-charged people on each side of it. In the so-called middle are the people who don't see a clear choice they can endorse, but who are able to be persuaded by a case of reason. Make that case and your issue succeeds. For gay marriage, equal rights is part but not all of the case.

Jeff,

Here's the rationale behind the argument. You've repeatedly stated your concerns that you wish to make absolutely clear that the institution of marriage is not at risk by extending "marriage" to same-sex couples without clear evidence that such a decision has no adverse impact.

My argument to this is that the institution is at more risk without such extension. Here is my rationale:

Currently 7 of 50 states (plus the District of Columbia) allow same-sex couples the right to marry. An addition, 3 other states recognize the validity of marriages performed in these seven states. Same sex marriage legislation is on the legislative dockets of several other states right now - to include Maryland. Public opinion on same sex marriage has shifted dramatically over the last 30 years - so it is fair to say that if this trend continues, and I believe it most certainly will, that the number of states that perform and recognize same sex marriages will continue to grow in the next several years.

You've cited as an example the Department of Defense's process of allowing gay and lesbian service members to serve openly in the military. The reason that the "process" occurred the way that it did was two-fold. First, and most important, Congress required that the President and Secretary of Defense certify that changing the policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell would have no adverse effect on the military - which required time to survey service members on their attitudes about serving with homosexuals. Secondly, DoD needed time to put in to place the proper education, training, and policy review to ensure the conditions for the first condition were possible. Both Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen fought extremely hard with Congress to ensure the ban was lifted, while at the same time working with the judicial branch to request that a court did not force DoD's hand during the process. Secretary Gates was fully aware that a court was very likely to find the ban discriminatory and unconstitutional - requiring immediate DoD implementation before the President could certify the results to Congress.

Now, back to the states - the problem that the states pose to the institution should be readily understandable. Two couples, one heterosexual, one homosexual, married in a state that allows same sex marriage move to a state that does not recognize the validity of the marriage - but only of one couple. This creates, under the law, a situation of unequal process and violates the 5th and and 14th amendments. It is only a matter of time before such a situation is challenged in court and based simply on the merits of the application of constitutional law, will be found (regardless of "feelings" on the issue) to be unconstitutional - period.

As far as examples of how same-sex marriage is harming the legal systems or the lives and marriages of other people - you do not have to look much further than Europe, where most countries have already gone down this path. Or closer to home, has the institution of marriage undergone systemic harm in the states where same-sex marriage is already legal?

"Like" my Facebook page
Brain Droppings Blog
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT16Rq3dAcHhqiAsPC5xUC...oR0pEpxQZw]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Seasbury's post
15-02-2012, 06:36 PM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
(15-02-2012 07:42 AM)morondog Wrote:  I concede that you have taken a reasonable position which I attacked without thought.
That's very good of you to say. Thank you MD!



(15-02-2012 12:05 PM)Seasbury Wrote:  Or closer to home, has the institution of marriage undergone systemic harm in the states where same-sex marriage is already legal?

It's not my field of expertise so I don't know the answer to that. I'd want the counsel of experts to tell me that. I also don't know how long it would take for "harm" to become obvious.

(15-02-2012 12:05 PM)Seasbury Wrote:  My argument to this is that the institution is at more risk without such extension.

I'm not sure which side of the argument you're now on. I think you're trying to be clever and say that not moving forward will cause more harm, but really you're saying that the proponents of gay marriage have already harmed the institution by putting it in a position of more risk. It sounds like you just proved my point. This is exactly why the approach of moving forward without study and careful planning is a bad idea.

(15-02-2012 12:05 PM)Seasbury Wrote:  It is only a matter of time before such a situation is challenged in court and based simply on the merits of the application of constitutional law, will be found (regardless of "feelings" on the issue) to be unconstitutional - period.

I don't have the background to know if the resolution of this scenario will result in gay marriage being found unconstitutional, and existing marriages summarily dissolved, or if a state's refusal to recognize the marriage will be found unconstitutional, and gay marriage will be mandated as valid nationwide. Perhaps this is a strategy of gay marriage proponents to force a constitutional challenge.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Jeff's post
15-02-2012, 07:54 PM (This post was last modified: 15-02-2012 07:57 PM by Seasbury.)
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
Jeff - you're cherry picking the points. I've laid out the case as best I can... Smile

I don't have an issue debating the points and I respect your opinion, although I completely disagree with it - just thought I'd throw that it in - hope you can continue to do the same Wink

"Like" my Facebook page
Brain Droppings Blog
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT16Rq3dAcHhqiAsPC5xUC...oR0pEpxQZw]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2012, 07:59 PM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
(15-02-2012 07:54 PM)Seasbury Wrote:  Jeff - you're cherry picking the points. I've laid out the case as best I can... Smile

OK, sorry if I missed the point, I wasn't trying to cherry pick.

(15-02-2012 07:54 PM)Seasbury Wrote:  I don't have an issue debating the points and I respect your opinion, although I completely disagree with it - just thought I'd throw that it - hope you can continue to do the same Wink

Thanks, I respect your opinion as well. Good luck with your own marriage if that's where you're headed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-02-2012, 08:08 PM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
(15-02-2012 07:59 PM)Jeff Wrote:  Thanks, I respect your opinion as well. Good luck with your own marriage if that's where you're headed.

not that it makes any difference, but I've been married to a wonderful woman for 12 years and we've raised 4 children.

My wife's cousin and her partner are gay - we went to their "wedding" 20 months ago in California - which wasn't a "legal" wedding since California adopted Proposition 8 at that time, They are expecting their first child any day now. They are in a fully committed relationship and deserve all the rights, privileges, and respect that comes with the title "marriage."

For what it's worth, I don't understand the attraction - but it's not about me - it's simply about equality...

"Like" my Facebook page
Brain Droppings Blog
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT16Rq3dAcHhqiAsPC5xUC...oR0pEpxQZw]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Seasbury's post
16-02-2012, 08:45 PM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
(14-02-2012 09:36 AM)Seasbury Wrote:  
(13-02-2012 08:56 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(09-02-2012 07:27 PM)Seasbury Wrote:  Marriage equality legislation is on the docket, again, in Maryland - but I think there are some Marylanders here on the forum, so it might serve a larger purpose.

I mean where's the resistance coming from? Western panhandle? Let's just give it to West Virginia and get it off our books. Eastern shore? Well it's always felt like a suburb of Delaware anyways.

Maryland is an interesting state. The "liberal" strongholds are the City of Baltimore, PG and Montgomery counties; however, this particular issue doesn't fit neatly into conservative v. liberal politics. PG County is the largest majority African-American county in the US and 9 times out of ten supports broad Democrat agendas - marriage equality splits the county - which is why Governor O'Malley is stumping with black preachers that are willing to get behind the legislation.

PG County here, and I got the ankle bracelet to prove it. African-American Churches are indeed apparently the main impetus behind any remaining resistance. Not sure why African-American Churches would be particularly more homophobic than any others?

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2012, 11:15 PM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
Looks like it's gonna pass, but homophobes are going to try to put it on the ballot as a referendum in the fall.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2012, 11:51 AM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
(21-02-2012 11:15 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Looks like it's gonna pass, but homophobes are going to try to put it on the ballot as a referendum in the fall.

I could be wrong, certainly wouldn't be a first..., but I think with all things being equal, it would pass by referendum in Maryland - but the margin would be razor thin....

"Like" my Facebook page
Brain Droppings Blog
[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT16Rq3dAcHhqiAsPC5xUC...oR0pEpxQZw]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-02-2012, 11:20 PM
RE: Local Politics - Maryland
(22-02-2012 11:51 AM)Seasbury Wrote:  
(21-02-2012 11:15 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Looks like it's gonna pass, but homophobes are going to try to put it on the ballot as a referendum in the fall.

I could be wrong, certainly wouldn't be a first..., but I think with all things being equal, it would pass by referendum in Maryland - but the margin would be razor thin....

I just don't understand how the margin could be razor thin. I mean goddam, ain't we the Free State.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: