http://www.purple-ducky.com/

and

http://blog.joehuffman.org/

;-)

It wouldn’t be.

As I see it, neither the pro- nor the anti-gay-marriage sides are fighting for a generic civil contract. At least to me, it appears that the mainstream of both sides is pushing for the government to force other people to do things their way, i.e. “the government must condemn what I call ’sin’!”, or “the government has to declare me to be normal!” Sure, one can pick a side that he/she prefers, but that doesn’t change the dynamic that’s been played out (note that I was crashed in a friend’s spare bedroom last November in California, so I saw a lot of the Prop 8 crap, firsthand).

Personally, I see the libertarian solution to the problem as the best one, for many reasons that I don’t even have to go into, here. It also seems like the obvious solution, and the one that could possibly be acceptable to everyone if presented with some level of eloquence and compassion. Fundamentalists and evangelicals are genuinely afraid that the world will go to hell in a handbasket if gay couples can get a marriage certificate, instead of just living together and getting a civil union certificate. Fine, then. Why should ANYONE get a GOVERNMENT marriage anyway?

It’s sad that said libertarian solution isn’t getting a lot of air time. This would be a wonderful opportunity for people to see how getting the government so involved in our lives isn’t good for anyone.

I fail to see how offering a generic civil contract that can be entered into by any two, or group of, people is ‘enforcing’ the beliefs of the GLBT community. The government should be in the domain of contract enforcement, if even that. I should be able to share my resources with anybody I choose – the level of love or sex involved is no business of the government.

I don’t think your view of marriage, or your church’s definition of marriage, should be redefined. No church should be forced to sanction marriages it does not agree with – be they hetero, homo, poly, or anything else. For that matter, your marriage would not be made null and void in the eyes of your God if the government expands a narrowly-issued contract to be available to all.

Marriage should be in the domain of the organization doing the marrying and the folks getting married.

Now, to the founding of the US and it’s Christian Heritage. I think that there is more evidence “for” than “against”.

There are three (at least) problems:
1) The establishment clause in the First Ammendment
2) Definition of religion
3) States rights

1 and 3 are similar in my view. The establishment clause prevents FedGov and only FedGov from establishing a state religion. The states are free to establish state religions as they see fit (or WERE free…)

#2 If FedGov is prohibited from establishing a religion then I propose that the Democratic Party, particularly the Green and Radical Left part should be banned as religions acting in FedGov.

Let folks do as they wish, so long as they do not impact me and my life. Re-defining marriage for my family and my church impacts me and my life.

The GLBT community appears to want positive sanction for their behavior from all folks. My source material (the Bible) says no can do. For government to enforce the beliefs of the GLBT community is to establish religion, thus violating the establishment clause.

If they are claiming that the only basis for making gay marriage illegal is that it’s not allowed in a certain religion, they’ve just made the most powerful argument in favor of gay marriage, in our system.

I personally don’t think marriage licensing should be a government function at all, nor do I think the law should make blanket provisions for “married” and “unmarried”. Contract law should be sufficient to deal with any and all issues.

Be that as it may, though, if the government does define “married” then one can argue all sorts of things about what it must mean. But any specifically religious aspects of marriage would be a violation of the First Amendment.

The “Constitution Party” idiots can’t even see that they’re undermining their own position…