I’ve wondered if suc an amendment happens if, ethically, I will have to get divorced. I’m married now, and I’ve no plans to leave my relationship, but if the federal government’s definition of marriage is that twisted and sick, is it ethically right to continue to take advantage of it when it is denied to so many others?
On the other hand, I’m not sure I have the courage of my convictions. I LIKE being married. There are a lot of advantages to it: that’s the whole point of this debate. Part of me feels like if all right-thinking hetero couples were to civilly divorce, it might at least keep the issue alive and public, and leave the chance for a repeal down the road. But it’s a very scary thought.
Frankly, I’m all for seperation of church and state even when it comes to heterosexual marriages.
What one has to do with the other is lost on me.
You want to create a union with someone, go ahead. It’s none of my business and it’s none of the governments business. If you feel that you are acting within the guidelines of your religion that it satisfies a “marriage” in your mind, that’s it.
It should have nothing to do with what the government considers “legal” or not.
It almost seems like the government wants to play matchmaker.
If your goal is to be “married”, then find a person of the clergy, stand on a rock somewhere, say a speech and “bango”, you’re married.
If your goal is to have health benefits simply because your friend has it and you want a piece of it, thats where it gets sticky.
There are so many intelligent people on this message board.
I give my full support to those who are in favor of same sex marriages. If two people are happy together and choose to commit to each other it shouldn’t matter what gender they are.
I’d be very upset. I’d like to say that I could make a change, but without citizenship here, there isn’t a whole lot I can do.
It’s ridiculous that this is even on the table. People are people, whether they’re gay or straight, black or white, Wheel-of-Fortune smart or Jeopardy smart.
It would be terrible if legislation like this passed. But I think it just might. And I think we will have to fight to have it overturned (or whatever the terminology is).
But here’s the toughest part: If the decision is made by majority rule (which it shouldn’t be, but probably will) we don’t stand a chance. Most Americans, from the reports I’ve heard, are against same-sex marriage. They don’t have a good reason to be against it, but they are nonetheless.
I don’t know what the mechanics behind a constitutional amendment are…maybe someone could enlighten me/us.
I’ll be sorely disappointed; however, we should all remember that the “noble experiment” of Prohibition was incorporated into the Constitution as the 18th Amendment in 1919 and then repealed in 1933. There is some history of the US citizenry coming to its collective senses and saying “Damn, what the hell were we smoking when we agreed to that?”
We can also take heart that in 1920, the year after Prohibition was ratified, the 19th Amendment was ratified, which recognized that the right to vote cannot be denied based on sex.
We as a nation seem follow up one bonehead move with a shift back toward sanity with some regularity.
I admire everyone who says they would stay and fight. I have to admit though, if a constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage passed, I would probably leave. My partner and I have discussed this, and we both agree that a constitutional amendment says it pretty loud and clear, America does not want queers. If that is the case, these queers won’t stay. We both love Vancouver, and have talked about living there someday for a couple of years anyway. So if a constitutional amendment passed, these queers would become Canada Queers.
I think that the first thing that I would do would be to print out thousands of copies of the constitution and then try to organize a series of busses to go to DC so that we could all stand in front of the Whitehouse and burn them.
After that, I don’t know. To be sure, support and work with groups that are working for its repeal, trying to get the State 100% out of the business of marriage altogether or both.
Mostly, I think that I would feel a great deal of despair. Specifically encoding inequity in to law is not what this country is supposed to be about.
Were this to happen, this would be a statement that America, as a nation, hates gay people, which means that America, a country I’ve loved my whole life, hates me. I would almost certainly spiral into a very deep depression, and I have a history of suicide attempts.
Were I to make it through all that, I would leave this country, and piss on and burn an American flag every Fourth of July from my compound in Canada. I would work against America and any and all of its interests in any way that I can.
I would travel back in time and tell everyone to work against this evil amendment.
Oh wait, I am back in time.
Everyone, work against this evil amendment! Write your Senators and your Representative and tell them you don’t support this. Write your state legislator and tell them you don’t support it. Talk to your friends and tell them to write. Donate money to groups fighting against it. Don’t wait until it passes and moan afterwards.
While in favor of civil unions, I do not support same-sex marriage. However, I feel that the issue is properly one for each state to work out on its own, as Massachusetts, Vermont, and Hawaii have done. I would be very disenheartened to see the Musgrave amendment pass.
I would, of course, be MORE disenheartened with no amendment and a Supreme Court finding that states were required to offer same-sex marriage, since that, too, would take the issue away from the states, and do so in a manner that ignored self-governance.
So - to answer the OP, I’d oppose a Musgarve amendment, but would support an amendment that ensured the federal constitution did not infringe upon the states’ right to determine the issue at their level.
In fairness, I’d also support a proposal to remove state sanction of “marriage” from the picture: that everyone, same- or opposite-sex, desiring a union would be granted one. Churches could then “marry” who they wished to, but the government would not recognize anyone’s marriage, gay or straight.
If that amendment were to pass, I’d probably stay married to my wife. God knows the only thing that keeps me from turning homosexual is the current illegality of same-sex marriages. So please, Mr. Bush. Save me from turning gay! Don’t worry about jobs or the environment, focus on this issue that you hope wins the election for you!
I will fight this amendment with every tool I have (and as an angry college student among other angry college students, I think there’s some powerful tools here). And if it passes, maybe I’ll send my resume to the Toronto Star or the Globe and Mail.
The President has decided that homos don’t have rights, at least not like heteros do.
This is not surprising; a few years back, he decided that Afghanis and certain other swarthy-lookin’ folks don’t have rights, either, and demonstrated this by locking them up in dog kennels in Cuba and denying them the same legal rights that the Bill Of Rights states that all human beings are due.
Therefore, faggots, lesbos, and dark-colored folks who don’t speak English and weren’t born in the US aren’t really human, apparently.
Plainly, this is the right thing to do. And if it isn’t, we should all shut up and behave, because to do otherwise while a war is on is unpatriotic. After all, if we aren’t with him, we’re against him. Remember?
Besides, none of the inhuman folks who aren’t entitled to rights would have voted for him anyway.
I’d be an insufferable know-it-all and remind everyone that you get the government that you vote for, especially if you’re too much of an idiot to bother voting.
Since I don’t know any gay couples it won’t affect me a bit; however, being as they’ve already given fairies, rainbows, and purple a bad name I’d be glad that there is at least one thing that is still sacred.
Well, lord knows we don’t want to sully the sacred name of marriage by letting gays marry. And on behalf of gays everywhere, we apologize for making you uncomfortable around fairies, rainbows, and purple.
Since the Dope is international, moving to Canada won’t solve all my problems I guess.
Is there a place online that I can track the progress of the Muskgrove amendment, so I know if it actually starts getting taken seriously?