NEW QUESTION: HERE COMES THE JUDGE?

At the Family Scholars blog there's a great discussion about the consequences of the idea that same-sex marriage is a fundamental civil right. Especially given the court challenges to the various state marriage amendments, this seems like an excellent time to look at these questions (and any related aspects you all want to discuss):

1) If same-sex marriage is a fundamental civil right, should it be imposed by courts over & against voters' wishes?
2) Should the state amendments be kept off ballots or (if they pass) struck down?
3) Is state-by-state same-sex marriage the equivalent of a nation"half slave, half free"?
4) Would there be different consequences for the nation as a whole if same-sex marriage were imposed nationally, or by the courts, vs. state-by-state or by voters? If, as Jonathan Rauch argues, "And it [= a Supreme Court decision requiring same-sex marriage] wouldn't get gay couples what we really need, which is marriage that's socially as well as legally recognized. No court can deliver that. A vote is a vote is a vote, but a marriage takes place in the eyes of one's community," is that enough reason to oppose court decisions--including state court decisions--that override the majority of voters, or is the end-result worth it for SSM supporters?

Click below to join the debate!

posted by Eve at 4:36 PM VOTE

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home