KERRY & GAY MARRIAGE

New York Post ^ | 2/06/04

[kattracks]

February 6, 2004 -- Wednesday's ruling by the Massachu setts Supreme Judicial Court that nothing short of gay marriage is acceptable under that state's constitution brings a politically volatile issue front and center.

The court, clarifying an earlier ruling, said giving same-sex couples all the rights and benefits of marriage

[goldstategop]

Jean F. Cheri is caught between a rock and a hard place. Oh the liberals will eat up this Massachusetts Supreme Court decision but it will repel swing voters turned off by the Massachusetts liberal image.

[counterpunch]

[Diogenesis]

Since homosexual marriage was designed, engineered, and foistered by
the New York Times, its writer Anthony Lewis and his wife,
South-African-born-now-Chief Justice Margaret H. Marshall of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts,
expect propaganda to be coming on this to "fix" it up.

[Adder]

I find this an interesting comment for anyone to consider, dumblecrat or republican:

For more than two centuries, family and the institution of marriage were "recognized by law" in the United States. There is a fundamental difference today, in that marriage and family issues are entirely "politically controlled." To be recognized by law is accepting of marriage and family as something created outside of government, so important that laws are needed to recognize it, but so established in the private domain that it must be respected and protected as involving fundamental rights. By the time the Massachusetts decision was made; "Simply put, the government creates civil marriage. ... In a real sense, there are three partners to every civil marriage: two willing spouses and an approving State. ... Civil marriage is created and regulated through exercise of the police power." From Men's News Daily

I don't know if that "recognized by law" is a true legal concept or not. If it is, it presents an avenue of attack, it would appear to me. But I'm not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV.

[NetValue]

You present an interesting possible strategy.

In parallel, I would love to see the people of Massachusetts rise up and remove these so-called "justices" through impeachment because their action IS misbehavior.

[Adder]

I would love for that to happen also. But I can't see it. Folk either don't feel empowered to do so or are not sufficiently outraged to do so.

[Dante3]

Next is leglization of polygamy. And then? Pets?

[wolicy_ponk]

See this article about Kerry and gay marriage. Kerry tells off the Pope about gay marriage The Hill- August 6, 2003

Kerry tells off the Pope • Presidential hopeful Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) responded to the Vatican’s call for Catholic elected officials to oppose gay marriage by telling Rome to stay out of American politics.

“It’s important not to have the church instructing politicians,” Kerry, a Catholic, told the Boston Herald.

Not everyone agrees. “Too many Catholic politicians want to have it both ways,” said former U.S. Ambassdor to the Vatican Raymond Flynn. “They want the Catholic vote, but then they go ahead and ignore Catholic teaching.”

Catholic lawmaker Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) has criticized the Pope John Paul II’s opposition to gay marriage, stating that “[i]t’s important not to have the church instructing politicians.”

[EQAndyBuzz]

"Next is leglization of polygamy. And then? Pets?"

My goldfish has mentioned on several occasions that she would like to see Niagara Falls. We are thinking of a fall wedding. Everyone is invited. For gifts, either brine shrimp or plant a tree in Israel would suffice.

Thank you

[johnb838]

Seems to me that the SCOTUS could find a "compelling state interest" in limiting the definition of marriage if it is able to do so in the case of Affirmative Action. Something tells me they will not see it that way.

[kennedy]

"I now pronounce you husband and husband. You may kiss the groom."

[mikeb704]

"I now pronounce you husband and husband. You may kiss the groom."

Just don't go for a car ride with him.