Comments on: 2008 Florida Amendment Results http://redhotandbluepolitics.com/2008/11/05/2008-florida-amendment-results/ dish and discussion of the latest news and events from the U.S. political scene Tue, 21 Apr 2009 01:30:25 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: grlpatriot http://redhotandbluepolitics.com/2008/11/05/2008-florida-amendment-results/comment-page-1/#comment-3339 grlpatriot Wed, 12 Nov 2008 16:25:32 +0000 http://redhotandbluepolitics.com/?p=831#comment-3339 I agree with Lee as well, Joe, on the wording of an amendment to make unions and partnership rights more palatable. However, I disagree with your exclusion of gays and lesbians from having a religious ceremony using the bible (or any other religious text for that matter). I support a church's right to only marry couples they want to marry, which includes a church's right to marry both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. You might recall there was also a time in this country when blacks and whites could not "marry" either. Times change and that's a good thing. Unfortunately, this amendment that just passed isn't about affording rights, it's about taking rights away from all domestic partners, including senior citizens who do not marry their partners. This amendment was unnecessary because same-sex marriage is already illegal in Florida under the Defense of Marriage Act. I'm not a legal expert, but I don't think we can have a new amendment that gives rights that this amendment strips away. The language is clear -- <blockquote>no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.</blockquote> I understand how both of you feel. If I was straight, I'd probably struggle with the idea of same-sex couples and marriage as well. It's not what we are taught starting from an early age. It's hard to understand that same-sex couples are exactly the same as opposite-sex couples. We work, pay taxes, go to church, and shop for groceries just like everyone else. We struggle with many of the same issues, share many of the same joys, and dream many of the same dreams for our families. As we realized years ago that banning interracial marriage was wrong, so to shall we shed our bigotry toward same-sex couples. I agree with Lee as well, Joe, on the wording of an amendment to make unions and partnership rights more palatable. However, I disagree with your exclusion of gays and lesbians from having a religious ceremony using the bible (or any other religious text for that matter). I support a church’s right to only marry couples they want to marry, which includes a church’s right to marry both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. You might recall there was also a time in this country when blacks and whites could not “marry” either. Times change and that’s a good thing.

Unfortunately, this amendment that just passed isn’t about affording rights, it’s about taking rights away from all domestic partners, including senior citizens who do not marry their partners. This amendment was unnecessary because same-sex marriage is already illegal in Florida under the Defense of Marriage Act. I’m not a legal expert, but I don’t think we can have a new amendment that gives rights that this amendment strips away. The language is clear —

no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.

I understand how both of you feel. If I was straight, I’d probably struggle with the idea of same-sex couples and marriage as well. It’s not what we are taught starting from an early age. It’s hard to understand that same-sex couples are exactly the same as opposite-sex couples. We work, pay taxes, go to church, and shop for groceries just like everyone else. We struggle with many of the same issues, share many of the same joys, and dream many of the same dreams for our families.

As we realized years ago that banning interracial marriage was wrong, so to shall we shed our bigotry toward same-sex couples.

]]> By: Joe http://redhotandbluepolitics.com/2008/11/05/2008-florida-amendment-results/comment-page-1/#comment-3291 Joe Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:43:05 +0000 http://redhotandbluepolitics.com/?p=831#comment-3291 I agree totally with Lee Polin. Wording the amendment would probably allow it to pass winning more support including mine. I have a problem with "marriage" because that is a relgious ritual, and there is nothing religious about being a homosexual. I would not want the bible used in the marriage of a gay couple. On another note, I said no to #1, because if they are here illegally they did not abide by U.S. laws, so why should they be able to buy our land? Land should be available to U.S. citizens! Also, local community colleges should be the responsibility of the "local community" in which they serve, not the state as a whole. That's why there are state colleges. I agree totally with Lee Polin. Wording the amendment would probably allow it to pass winning more support including mine. I have a problem with “marriage” because that is a relgious ritual, and there is nothing religious about being a homosexual. I would not want the bible used in the marriage of a gay couple. On another note, I said no to #1, because if they are here illegally they did not abide by U.S. laws, so why should they be able to buy our land? Land should be available to U.S. citizens! Also, local community colleges should be the responsibility of the “local community” in which they serve, not the state as a whole. That’s why there are state colleges.

]]> By: LEE POLIN http://redhotandbluepolitics.com/2008/11/05/2008-florida-amendment-results/comment-page-1/#comment-2927 LEE POLIN Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:09:45 +0000 http://redhotandbluepolitics.com/?p=831#comment-2927 HI- MY THOUGHT ON THE MARRIAGE AMENDMENT IS THE FOLLOWING: I THINK GETTING AN AMENDMENT ON FOR A "LEGAL UNION" OR "LEGAL PARTNERSHIP RIGHTS",AND LOSING ANY REFERENCE TO MARRIAGE WOULD BE A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE MET WITH GREAT DEAL LESS RESISTANCE, AND WOULD EVENTUALLY ACCOMPLISH THE GOAL. HI- MY THOUGHT
ON THE MARRIAGE AMENDMENT IS THE FOLLOWING: I THINK GETTING AN AMENDMENT ON FOR A “LEGAL UNION” OR “LEGAL PARTNERSHIP RIGHTS”,AND LOSING ANY REFERENCE TO MARRIAGE WOULD BE A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE MET WITH GREAT DEAL LESS RESISTANCE, AND WOULD EVENTUALLY ACCOMPLISH THE GOAL.

]]>