Sounds exactly like a good federalist to me, and something Fred Thompson says all the time. Let each state decide what to do, but don’t pass a federal law. Since we are electing a President, that’s a good position to be in.
But I’m guessing that this article is written by a Huckabee supporter, an evangelical who would like Huckabee’s tendency to use the government to take care of us for our own good.
Meanwhile, Romney supports DOMA and a constitutional marriage amendment, both of which attempt to protect a state from the actions of another state regarding gay marriage.
Of course, nobody thinks that a person should be denied employment because of their private sex life.
“Of course, nobody thinks that a person should be denied employment because of their private sex life.”
What does the Law in 94’ have to do with laws that always have been on the book?
Anyone explain this one to me...I thought it was illegal before to fire someone based on sexual orientation (along with a laundry list of other things)? What was this new law (in 94’) about and why does it alter the situation?