[dixiechick2000]

"Basically so far, it is a judge-made controversy," Thompson said. "No state or governor has signed off on such legislation on the state level that has endorsed marriage between the same sexes. There may have been a couple of courts that said the Constitution of their states has required that, so it's a judicially made situation as far as I am concerned."

Reread what Fred said.
He wasn't wrong.

The courts have gone crazy, NOT the legislatures...yet.

[Huck]

There may have been a couple of courts that said the Constitution of their states has required that, so it's a judicially made situation as far as I am concerned."

Yeah, I see what you mean. And listen, I totally understand the problem with runaway judiciary power, but...

what does he suggest? On the one hand, he says leave it up to the states. On the other hand, he's basically discounting what a state gubmint decided. if he's a federalist, what business is it of his how a state arrives at their policy? It's their policy. Does he not believe state courts should interpret their own constitutions?

And he says he wouldn't support civil unions in NH? What's he talking about? Shouldn't his answer be that if NH wants gay marriage, it's up to the people of NH to decide? Seems all over the map on it.