(Untitled)

Nov 10, 2005 15:30

This post is in response to the couple put up about Prop 2. The reason they decided to make the amendment was that several other states have had their anti gay marriage laws called into court and this amendment will protect against that. I abstained from voting for several reasons. First of all I believe that the state should have nothing to do ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 6

swimchick61887 November 10 2005, 16:02:35 UTC
thanks jenn for clarifying. I think i may have opened a can of worms that I should have kept closed b/c there's little lj debate raging on my lj, but it's all good.

Reply

kerby683 November 10 2005, 20:04:01 UTC
Opened a can of worms? Maybe.

But we knew that would be coming when you were going to one of the most liberal schools in the country and still talking to all of us from one of the most conservative parts of the country. Don't worry about it.

Reply


kerby683 November 10 2005, 20:14:59 UTC
I have to really disagree with you Jennifer, but only on two points. First of all, that the amendment was written badly. I thought it was brilliant. Second, that our parents who were married are no longer married. The amendment reduces marriage to the religious definition, which you just said was what was real and important in the first place. It also provides the practical benefits of marriage, the driving reason behind your argument for civil unions.

Although the entry is anti-proposition 2, it ironically underlines all the real reasons the amendment was passed. It is in fact a much more concise and readable argument for the amendment than what I put in my journal.

Reply

balletbabe887 November 10 2005, 20:24:38 UTC
Hence the reason I didn't vote. I can see both sides of the issue. However the fact that many brilliant minds here at Rice and minds that I know are much smarter than mine have seen the flaws in the wording of the ammendment makes me believe what I posted above. I see more court cases dealing with the wording of the ammendment more than anything else. Anyway this is a very hot topic and although I still view myself as moderately conservative, this topic is one that I can see myself being more liberal on. What you said about Bryne going to one of the most liberal college campuses in the country is true however almost all campuses are more liberal than the small environment we all grew up in. Mine included in that. We had disagreements back home over issues just as explosive as this one and our group of friends ranged from the most conservative to the most liberal. I see no need for apoligies from anyone on their viewpoints however I also see no need for name calling or insults which is whaat I have mainly read on Bryne's lj ( ... )

Reply

kerby683 November 10 2005, 20:37:14 UTC
lol drunken debate!!

Don't you get into the habit of accepting what others say because they are supposedly smarter than you. You especially, valedictorian. If you want to try to turn that argument around, I believe the politicians have a lot more experience in the area than your Rice comrades. Although I do wish I could hear what they were saying.

And I must admit that although I try to avoid name-calling, my tone could sometimes use improvement. Sorry if I'm so sarcastic once in a while as to be rude.

Reply

kerby683 November 10 2005, 20:43:50 UTC
Hey, and could you by any chance tell me what they proposed as an alternative? I'm actually pretty interested in what the think tank is saying.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up