Skip to comments.
David Frum's Diary, FEB. 27, 2004: Eight Questions For Andrew Sullivan
National Review ^
| 2/27/04
| David Frum
Posted on 02/27/2004 12:42:01 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
As clear and inarguable a presentation as is humanly possible, to the "states rights"-or-bust advocates, precisely why the resolution of this crucial flashpoint issue can NOT be resolved at the state level.
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Excellent article! Thanks for posting this!
2
posted on
02/27/2004 12:46:45 PM PST
by
RebelBanker
(Negotiate? [BANG] Anybody else want to negotiate?)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Great post and comment. We may be a nation of 50 "sovereign states," but we are one people, part of a single society or even single civilization. If the people of Massachusetts want to live as perverts, let them all move to France.
3
posted on
02/27/2004 12:47:13 PM PST
by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
I suspect that letting the states decide will over time gradually evolve into a demand to allow the most liberal states to impose their social values on the others through the mechanism of a million petty lawsuits on a thousand different issues. Worth repeating.
4
posted on
02/27/2004 12:48:51 PM PST
by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
bump
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
There are many aspects to gay marriage which have yet to be considered. One that has occured to me, that I have not seen discussed anywhere, is the right of a gay man or gay woman who is a US Citizen to bring over a gay fiance or fiancee [who knows which would be which] on a K-1 fiance(e) visa.
These sorts of visas are issued essentially as of right, provided that both parties are "free to marry" [never married before, or lawfully no longer married by the usual means -- this will rarely be a problem since right now essentially no country permits gays to be married]. There is no quota, and they go to the head of the line.
So, bring your gay boyfriend or lesbian girlfriend over to the US - by calling it marriage.
6
posted on
02/27/2004 12:51:14 PM PST
by
Flash Bazbeaux
("I'll have the moo goo gai pan without the pan, and some pans.")
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
If homosexuals are allowed to marry and it must be recognized by the full faith clause of the Constitution, why isn't my concealed carry permit recognize outside the state of issuance.
If I have a CCW permit from one state and live in another state, why isn't recognized by the state I live in?
Just asking cause I want CCW in my home state, just to PO the daley machine, but I am not going to mention my home state.
7
posted on
02/27/2004 12:51:46 PM PST
by
dts32041
( "Repeal the 16th and 17th amendments.")
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
When I was growing up Divorce and Homosexuality were both considered Abominations.
8
posted on
02/27/2004 12:51:47 PM PST
by
buffyt
(Kerry is now one of those (communists) who we fought against. {Aloha Ronnie quote})
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Yup. Depressing, isn't it? We've GOT to get that constitutional ammendment passed.
9
posted on
02/27/2004 12:53:10 PM PST
by
walden
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Excellent piece - thank you.
As Foghorn Leghorn might say: "Son, I say, Son, you gotta think these things through!"
10
posted on
02/27/2004 12:55:42 PM PST
by
bootless
(Never Forget)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Thank you David Frum. Solid arguments.
11
posted on
02/27/2004 1:14:03 PM PST
by
King Black Robe
(With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle; tpaine
Hey, tp....I don't have much time today, but I thought you'd enjoy this article.
12
posted on
02/27/2004 1:14:58 PM PST
by
King Black Robe
(With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
To: Flash Bazbeaux
So, bring your gay boyfriend or lesbian girlfriend over to the US - by calling it marriage. Following the Mass Court ruling, you don't even have to be gay to marry a same sex person. You could start bringing your entire village over one by one. This really has little to do with one's sexual orientation.
Think of other issues too. Say you're a single military retiree on full pension. The Doc tells you you're not going to live too long and once you die, your pension ends. Why not marry one of your best friends so that he can keep getting the survivor benefits for the rest of his life? How about folks that have no real heirs. Their estate goes to the government is they don't leave it to someone. Even if they leave it to someone in their will, the state and the Feds will tax the hell out of it. Why not just marry your buddy so he doesn't have to pay inheritance tax?
13
posted on
02/27/2004 1:48:39 PM PST
by
Ditto
( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
To: King Black Robe
That's always your first mistake.. You imagine you are thinking.
14
posted on
02/27/2004 3:33:25 PM PST
by
tpaine
(I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but the U.S. Constitution defines conservatism; - not the GOP. .)
To: tpaine
What are you talking about?
15
posted on
02/27/2004 3:48:15 PM PST
by
King Black Robe
(With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
To: King Black Robe
What were you?
16
posted on
02/27/2004 4:16:13 PM PST
by
tpaine
(I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but the U.S. Constitution defines conservatism; - not the GOP. .)
To: tpaine
See you around. I'm not playing this game.
17
posted on
02/27/2004 4:29:00 PM PST
by
King Black Robe
(With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Good stuff. This last sentence says it all:
And since the proponents of same-sex marriage have chosen 2004 as the year in which to bring matters to a head, they have no fair complaint if the opponents of same-sex marriage choose make their reply in that same year.
To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Outstanding work by Frum.
Neatly points out the trap laid by Sullivan, and deftly handles it by raising the difficult real world questions raised by Gay Activists who desire that a new right be read into the civil law by judicial fiat.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
19
posted on
02/27/2004 4:33:53 PM PST
by
section9
(Major Motoko Kusanagi says, "John Kerry: all John F., no Kennedy..." Click on my pic!)
To: buffyt
When I was growing up Divorce and Homosexuality were both considered Abominations.What changed?
20
posted on
02/27/2004 4:36:20 PM PST
by
jwalsh07
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson