a 'spaination

[paedraggaidin]

Here we go, julival.

In yesterday's elections, among other happenings, the electorate in Maine voted to strike down the state's law allowing gay marriage, by a 53-47 margin

Comments

[ex_restless]

Overturning Roe v. Wade wouldn't be an example of judicial activism. It would be a proper reading of the constitution. I understand your desire to rant, but that's not a fair characterization at all.

As far as tax exempt status, in order for what you say to be effected, the rules which govern tax exempt status would have to change. As it stands, a church discussing issues that cross over from faith to political action are well within the bounds of a tax exempt religious institution.

[paedraggaidin]

But see, there's a difference between "discussing issues" and doing what the Church has done with gay marriage bills (i.e. instructed voters how to vote and donated money to political causes). Like I said I am never going to support gagging churches or anyone else who spout off anti-gay rhetoric (or racism, or sexism, or anything else), but when that rhetoric turns into political action, then I believe they've broken the tax-exemption rules

[ex_restless]

See, I don't even think that Roe v. Wade was political activism. I think the justices actually thought at that time that they were offering a proper reading of the constitution. I just think it was wrong. Judicial activism comes into play when a justice has an idea what they want a law to be, and they interpret the constitution according to that desire, as opposed to what the Constitution actually says

[ex_restless]

Nice.

polemical

[karcy]

Although I agree, until those arguing for gay rights on the secular sphere choose to be silent and respect the theological conclusions of the Church, I cannot offer mutual respect.

To put it very simply: if its believers strongly believe that popular moral values should be the teaching of the Church, why should I make it easier for heresy to happen?

[swampfaye]

"the people" are in favor of civil unions, so they aren't ignorant or stupid, they just realize there is a difference between marriage and civil unions.

[travelintheways]

This.

As for gay marriage specifically, I really fail to see how it actually affects anyone who isn't getting gay married - except the children gay couples might adopt, and all the evidence points to gay couples providing healthy homes, as much as your average heterosexual couple. But really, this whole "institution of marriage" business is a bunch of crap. Other people's happiness does not infringe upon your own. Good lord.

One of my friends had a great take on this. Her fb status was: Mandy (X) "is tired of hearing anti-gay people say 'But I have gay friends!' NO, YOU DON'T. Friends don't vote to invalidate their friends' families."