I TOTALLY agree with you. I realize that without the imposition of the federal government of laws and initiatives, many changes in the society would not have taken place. However, THOSE changes that you mentioned were changes that were absolutely necessary due to the systematic oppression of an entire group of people and they would not have occured without the involvement of the federal govenment. This is not a situation like that.
In the case of gay marriage, you have a situation where the government, as it did with interracial marriage 50 years ago, trying to tell people that they cannot marry whom they wish. Just as in the case of interracial couples, the government has no place and no right to come into the personal lives of these individuals and tell them that they cannot marry who they want which is exactly what its doing by limiting the definition of marriage in a state constitution. Now, personally, I have my reservations about homosexuality and yada yada yada, but my feelings from a political standpoint are completely different and I have the responsibility to keep my feelings about the next man or woman who may be my neighbor, classmate, co-worker, or whomever, to myself. Their choice to marry someone that I don't really agree with is not going to harm me or my choice of who I marry. That, in my opinion, is the position the government, both state and federal, should take.
Quote:
Originally posted by sigmadiva
I hear what you are saying, but to be fair, we are a society governed by laws issued by the government - people we elect.
It was because of the interference of government in peoples lives that ended slavery. It was the interference of government that established the Civil Rights Acts. It was the interference of government that gave women and minorities the right to vote. It was the interference of government that established Title IX.
I presume that you are angered by the interference of government in peoples lives to establish morality, but not civil order. Please correct me if I am wrong.
|