Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (194613)	7/16/2004 7:45:47 AM
From: brian1501	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575327

Really.......and out of the left's "push" came the right's effort to implement a constitutional amendment. That just happened out of thin air without pre thought.....interesting. Altering the constitution is the only way to head off activist judges from allowing gay marriage. It doesn't take a rocket scientist, or some pre-existing plan to know what your options are. Brian

To: tejek who wrote (194613)	7/19/2004 7:01:31 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575327

Gay marriage was an issue pushed on to the agenda by the left. I assume when you say "pushed", you mean the gays trying to get married. To an extent, but I mostly mean the judges and local officials who went along. They are the people pushing to change the situation, they are the people who decided to make it an issue at this time. Once that happened the right responded. Why did the right respond? Are they the moral authority on these issues? They have every bit as much right to fight for their agendas and opinions. If its ok for those who support gay marriage to campaign for it at this time then its also ok for those who are against it to campaign against it now. Really.......and out of the left's "push" came the right's effort to implement a constitutional amendment. That just happened out of thin air without pre thought.....interesting. That statement doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't really understand what you are trying to say. The left decided to push for a change, the right decided to oppose this change. Since the left started to effect actual change the right started to make its response more then just verbal and tried to pass laws and constitutional amendments. The above paragraph is a simplification because its not a 100% left/right issue, but most of the supporters of massive and quick change in this area are on the left and most of those seeking to stop it are on the right. Personally I don't have a problem with states choosing to allow "domestic partnerships". I have a little problem with legally calling those partnerships marriages. I have a lot of problems with state judges possibly ramming a major social and legal change down the throat of a country esp. when the majority of the country does not support this change at this time. Can we assume that whenever the left "pushes" on an issue, the right will come up with a constitutional amendment? Nope. Most of the time it will not. Hitler didn't start out killing. He began by placing restrictions on the people he considered objectionable. To maintain the status quo in regard to gay marriage is not placing a restriction on anyone, except perhaps judges who would change things. And Hitler's thugs did start out killing. Then later a whole series of draconian laws where past, then people where made in to slaves, and then the systematic killing or "objectionable" or "undesirable" people began, none of which is anything like what Bush, or the Republican party is doing at this time, or have done in the past, or shows any sign of doing in the future. Tim