1 - 10 Next
Where is the first amendment issue? The bakers can continue to believe whatever they want about marriage. This is about public accomodation. Unless you claim that active discrimination in a commercial transaction is required by your religion ... I bet these bakers have no problem with pagans order cakes, or divorce cakes, or ...
2000 California Prop 22, 62% anti-Gay 2008 California Prop 8, 52% anti-Gay 2013 Field Poll of California, 59% pro-Gay While one can argue that Federal Courts should have deferred to the political process, I suggest you do the math. Had your side "won" in the Perry case, you would surely have lost at the ballot box next year. Perry just saved the state $100 million for a repeal vote.
Pants on fire, Ms Fiedorek. The legislative history of DOMA is very explicit that it is animus driven, the Supreme Court did not need to draw any conclusions as to the intolerance behind this legislation.
In response to:

DOMA and the “Living Constitution”

glindsay Wrote: May 15, 2013 10:52 AM
Bill Clinton has a far more successful marriage than any of the republican candidates last time, excepting Mitt Romney. Who would have thought that the Mormon would be the only republican with only one wife.
In response to:

DOMA and the “Living Constitution”

glindsay Wrote: May 13, 2013 9:25 AM
While I agree that all states should recognize marriage for same-sex couples, a marriage is a private contract, witnessed by the state through the marriage license. Adoptions are a legal action, so must be recognized as a public act.
In response to:

DOMA and the “Living Constitution”

glindsay Wrote: May 13, 2013 9:23 AM
FF&C does not require states to recognize marriages from other states. They do so because of comity, the practical realization of the chaos that non-recognition can cause if widespread. Recognition is denied Only under extraordinary circumstances, which includes polygamy, and has included certain under age marriages. The exclusion of recognition for lawfully contracted marriages by same sex couples has clear harm to the couple, and no benefit to the states denying recognition. This inconsistency will eventually reach absurd proportions, and the clear animus behind banning recognition to marriages between same-sex couples will cause DOMA to fail from it's own faults.
This is nonsense. Marriage is not redefined by letting couples commit. Marriage was redefined when Newt Gingrich had affairs with the next wife while the prior one was sick in the hospital.
In response to:

Senate Passes Internet Sales Tax

glindsay Wrote: May 06, 2013 8:36 PM
Managing the sales tax is straight forward. There are plenty of tax services which will integrate into an invoice. This current exemption amounts to a government preference for online businesses, to the harm of main street stores.
In response to:

Laissez Faire Marriage Part II

glindsay Wrote: May 06, 2013 8:24 PM
Your side forced this issue to be marriage for same sex couples. Remember, 21 of your 31 amendments explicitly ban civil unions or domestic partner laws. You have shown your real agenda is anti-Gay, not pro-Marriage.
In response to:

The Play’s the Thing

glindsay Wrote: Apr 26, 2013 5:10 PM
Domestic partnership failed, because separate is inherently unequal.
1 - 10 Next