Gay Marriage Ammendment (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 06, 2024, 07:09:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Gay Marriage Ammendment (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Should an ammendment be passed by the state congresses to make it where only one man and one woman can be united in marriage?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 52

Author Topic: Gay Marriage Ammendment  (Read 12372 times)
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« on: June 07, 2008, 10:58:21 AM »

Federal constitutional amendment? No
Banning it on a state level? Yes
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« Reply #1 on: June 07, 2008, 01:07:16 PM »

Federal constitutional amendment? No
Banning it on a state level? Yes

Not a very libertarian position there.
Sure it is, I want the state government to exercise its power, not the federal government.  You can argue that perhaps limiting marriage is not libertarian, but the idea of libertarianism is to stop the flow of government, not to lead the country into anarchy.  Sometimes government is necessary, but in a very limited and not federal form.  To have a personal opinion is quite different then forcing it down the entire countries throat.
Logged
DownWithTheLeft
downwithdaleft
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,548
Italy


Political Matrix
E: 9.16, S: -3.13

« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2008, 07:16:35 AM »

Federal constitutional amendment? No
Banning it on a state level? Yes

Not a very libertarian position there.
Sure it is, I want the state government to exercise its power, not the federal government.  You can argue that perhaps limiting marriage is not libertarian, but the idea of libertarianism is to stop the flow of government, not to lead the country into anarchy.  Sometimes government is necessary, but in a very limited and not federal form.  To have a personal opinion is quite different then forcing it down the entire countries throat.

The government should have nothing to do with marriage. They shouldn't be licensing or banning it.
Do you say the government should have nothing to do with civil unions either?  That is kind of out there, we need something to say people are together so they can have joint bank accounts, etc.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 13 queries.