Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sometimes, we ARE our own worst enemies...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
DarkmoonIkonoklast Donating Member (829 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 05:46 PM
Original message
Sometimes, we ARE our own worst enemies...
Edited on Wed Jul-26-06 05:50 PM by DarkmoonIkonoklast
   This morning, the Washington State Supreme Court upheld a ban on same-sex unions, leaving Massachusetts as the only state granting full marriage rights to gays and lesbians.
   Many, perhaps most, on both sides of this bloody debate were surprised by the decision... I wish I could say I was.
   This debate, like the one over abortion, hinges ultimately over conflicts between secular law
and fundamental religious beliefs... in this case between marriage as a secular institution and marriage as a religious sacrament.
   I can't help thinking the issue really does come down to one of semantics.
   By insisting on using the term "Marriage" to define what is, what can only be, a Civil (or Domestic) Partnership, advocates do two things which are, I believe, detrimental to the cause:

  •    1] They blur the distinction between Civil (secular) institutions and Religious sacraments, which are, under Article 1, outside the legitimate purview of the State; while, at the same time
  •    2] They require the State to define the difference(s) between a Civil (secular) institution and a Religious sacrament.

   Late in the 19th century (I'll update with more precision when I have the relevant statutes) the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the State had no authority to determine the legitimacy of any religious tenet, practice or belief, as to do so would require the state to define religion. I submit that the same principle applies here.
   We who support equality for all must never provide "talking point" ammunition for our opponents, or diminish the legitimacy of our issue by confusing, or diffusing our focus on, that issue.
   I'll have more to say on this later...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TwentyFive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. Agreed - Liberalism is defined by equality under the law & human rights
Edited on Wed Jul-26-06 06:00 PM by TwentyFive
All Democrats should be behind same sex marriage and FULL EQUALITY 100%.

Back in the 60's, JFK called entertainment/hospitality industry CEOs to the oval office and ENCOURAGED THEM (meaning, do this if you know what's good for you) to provide equal treatment for blacks in their business. Today, we need this same kind of leadership from the democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkmoonIkonoklast Donating Member (829 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. You're doing it...
   Your use of the phrase "same-sex marriage", shows that you've entirely missed the point of my post, which is, that by insisting on using the term "Marriage", we as advocates a) blur the distinction between Civil (secular) institutions and Religious sacraments, b) enflame the passions of those who might, otherwise, be supportive of the basic CIVIL rights concept, and c) put the State in the position of having to define the difference(s) between civil institutions and religious sacraments.
   I say again: we need to be far more careful of our semantics, far more precise in our terminology, so as to cease providing ammunition for our opponents, and to cease diffusing our focus.
   What we must pursue, with diamond focus and total commitment, is the adoption, by the State, of the Domestic (or Civil) Partnership, as the ONLY recognized familial union.
   Let those who require the blessing of their Church seek it within their Sacrament of Marriage, but if they want their union recognized by the State, want the legally protected benefits {tax status, medical and other fiscal benefits, inheritance, custody rights, et al.} conferred by such recognition, let THEM register their Domestic (or Civil) Partnership as well...
   ... and let us be more deliberate with our own use of language.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkmoonIkonoklast Donating Member (829 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. I need help researching...
   ... 19th-century (latter third) Supreme Court decisions.
   I welcome any and all input, whether on additional research sources (the searchable db in FindLaw doesn't go back far enough) or actual knowledge of relevant Court decisions. I discovered this particular decision while researching a marital rights case back in 1977... then, I was using the actual books in the King County Law Library, and I'm perfectly willing to do that again, but if someone could help find that opinion sooner, it would be much better... and much appreciated!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sam Odom Donating Member (580 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-26-06 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
3. Correct ! The term "Marriage" is the deal breaker n/t
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC