Replies

TOUGH STOUGH wrote:
Now that activist judges in several states seem to have suddenly and incorrectly found a homosexual right to marriage and are attempting to foist homosexual marriage upon the nation, an amendment is a virtual necessity.

________________________________________________

So? -- Let the gay activists & judges "foist" their marriage claims. -- You say they have no rights on this issue? -- Ignore them. Refuse to recognize those claims in your State or County.

-- No amendment necessary.
197 tpaine

____________________________________________________

ET writes:
Naive at best.
-199-

_________________________________________________

Naive? How so?

--- States are not required to recognize the unconstitutional acts of other States, or of the federal government.
Surely, -- you can agree with me on that point?
204 -tpaine-

_____________________________________

TOUGH STOUGH wrote: You can't do that. They will move to other states and demand recognition.

There are plenty of legal means for homosexuals to resolve their legal issues other than marriage.
As far as the tax issue is concerned, a tax code that is fairer to all is the answer, as you suggest.
As for the military--- there are plenty of other people the military does not accept. I'd like to be a quarterback for the New York jets too. But I can't. That's the way it is.

______________________________________

What good would it do for queers to move to your State or County, if you don't recognize their 'rights'?

They would do it to force the issue.

Let's say a married, homosexual couple living in Massachusettes (which recognizes gay marriage) decides in their old age to move to Florida (which does not recognize gay marriage). You think they're not going to move? They'll move and they'll aggressively push the issue.

Once they get the right to be married in certain states, homosexuals will claim their liberty is hindered because they lack the right to relocate to a state of their choice AND have their marriage recognized. You and people like you will argue the same. It's about incrementalism and we know it.