tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8638998837390550464.post5833542335701136496..comments2024-02-26T11:57:59.502-06:00Comments on Schultz's Take: Constitutional Prejudice: Why the Minnesota Senators Got it Wrong on Same-Sex MarriagesProfDSchultzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14428175737629801650noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8638998837390550464.post-47577044528556264092011-05-02T13:37:46.822-05:002011-05-02T13:37:46.822-05:00Rudy:
If the decision by Judge Walker were upheld ...Rudy:<br />If the decision by Judge Walker were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court then the MN senate plan would be unconstitutional. The CA decision is based on the US Constitution and right now only binding on CA. However, if the S.Ct. strikes down Prop 8 on constitutional grounds, that would call into question the MN proposal.<br /><br />Does this answer your question? I am not sure but let me know.ProfDSchultzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14428175737629801650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8638998837390550464.post-17850018295566619152011-04-30T06:59:55.395-05:002011-04-30T06:59:55.395-05:00Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be...Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else?<br /><br />"PROPOSITION 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California constitution the notion that opposite sex couples are superior to same sex couples." <br /><br />Judge Vaughn Walker<br /><br />Is this ruling (and Prop 8) in any way relevant to what the MN Senate Republican's plan is for gay marriage in MN?Emeryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00523849258546459342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8638998837390550464.post-88995409182558175642011-04-29T14:05:40.514-05:002011-04-29T14:05:40.514-05:00I would like to see all those pushing for an amend...I would like to see all those pushing for an amendment to ban same-sex marriage point to the one line in the Constitution that gives the state purview over personal relationships. I would also like to see them make an argument for such an amendment that isn't based on some passage from the Bible (likely at odds with the rest of the Bible) and their own disgust.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com