Law, Crime & Justice
The Gay Marriage Debate
- njkaters
This archived discussion is "read only" due to the absence of an active Feature Writer/moderator for this topic.
» njkaters - Basic Government 101
In response to Basic Government 101 posted by BrianTubbs:
Just a short note, I understand and agree with your historical analysis and the title Basic Government 101 is pretty condescending. I am not ignorant of what the Founding Fathers believed and knew, I am saying that the very fact that people keep harkening back to the Founding Fathers means that we are forever determined to engage in partisan bickering. Instead of having people duel it out over what they think the Founding Fathers aid, how about we determine our own course? I agree that the voters should have an opportunity, which is why state amendments are more desirable than federal amendments. The question then is whether the full faith and credit clause can be applied from state to state when a few states may choose in favor of civil unions while others do not.
There are a lot of issues here that may not be translatable to the Founding Fathers because while they may have had some abstract idea of a continental nation, they had no concept of gay marriage, blacks and whites having the same rights (even among the most liberal members of the Const. Congress) or women having the same rights as men.
The Supreme Court is activist with its current roster of justices, whether we like it or not, and the isolation from popular dissent for justices is the only way it can work. Otherwise, we would have the same problems that we have in Congress with noncompetitive elections, corruption, and apathy.
-- posted by njkaters
This archived discussion is "read only" due to the absence of an active Feature Writer/moderator for this topic.
Please follow the guidelines set forth in the Suite101 Posting Etiquette when adding to the discussion.