| ||
Sat 2024-12-21
Fri 2024-12-20
Thu 2024-12-19
Wed 2024-12-18
hydroxychloroquine fraud withdrawn Tue 2024-12-17
Sun 2024-12-15
Sat 2024-12-14
Fri 2024-12-13
Thu 2024-12-12
Tue 2024-12-10
Search
Archives
2023
12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
One good site
MDN
Nelson Minar
Blog licensed under a Creative Commons License
|
Massachusetts has temporarily
allowed gay marriage (it won't last), and already the Democratic
candidates are panicking. Or as the NYT
article says:
Most of the Democratic presidential candidates went to great lengths
on Tuesday to emphasize that they opposed gay marriage, even as they
restated their support for some forms of legal rights for same-sex
couples. But the candidates also voiced strong opposition to any
constitutional amendment barring gay marriage; supporting it would be
nothing short of suicide in a Democratic primary. But that stance
provides what even Democrats said would be a clean target for
Republicans to hammer next year.
This prevarication is what is so awful about America's mediocre two
party system. The Democratic candidates are all too craven to actually
take a leadership stance on social issues. Bush isn't afraid to be
hateful:
Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. ...
Why can't a Democratic candidate be equally forceful, but in a humane
way? One thing I admire about Dean is his willingness to actually take
strong positions. But even he shies away from gay 'marriage'. At least
he favours gay
partnerships with pretty much all the legal protections of
marriage, and even enacted such in Vermont.
Today's decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court violates this important principle. I will work with congressional leaders and others to do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage.
— I remain your second class citizen, Nelson
|
|
