SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (31455)2/25/2004 7:02:41 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (3) of 793717
 
I hate to say it, but I agree with a part of Kerry's position on the issue, namely, that gay marriage should not be a federalized, Constitutional issue; the States can deal with it as they see fit.

Traditionally, states have set the rules for the manner in which the status of persons is considered, i.e., when is an individual an adult, how old can persons be before they are allowed to marry, the degrees of consanguinity that is allowable before marriage will be prohibited, whether community property or some other method is the legal regime governing property acquired during marriage, and the like. The federal government generally does not intrude into these types of issues.

I see very little difference between these matters and gay marriage. Making it a Constitutional issue is ridiculous.

C2@butI'mstilllvotingforW.com
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News