| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
 Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 3:29 pm Post subject: Gay marriag passes in Maine |
 |
|
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/06/maine.same.sex.marriage/index.html
| Quote: |
Same-sex marriage became legal in Maine on Wednesday as Gov. John Baldacci signed a bill less than an hour after the state legislature approved it.
"I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage," said Baldacci, a Democrat.
But he raised the possibility that the residents of the state would overturn the law, saying, "Just as the Maine Constitution demands that all people are treated equally under the law, it also guarantees that the ultimate political power in the State belongs to the people." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hey, if Maine has a silent 'e', they certainly wouldn't omit the useful 'e' in marriage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed May 06, 2009 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It might just be an 'optical illusion' but 3 states in a month...Iowa, Vermont and Maine...as someone mentioned last month, we may have reached the tipping point on this issue. At least for now, it seems to be framed as an 'equal protection of the law' interpretation. If that holds, then the argument is essentially over. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
semi-fly
Joined: 07 Apr 2008
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Supreme Court will never touch the issue. Though I have to wonder how Federalism will apply in such issues when a happily married gay couple moves from one of the aforementioned states to say Texas or Arkansas (for posting purposes these two states do not recognize same sex marriage) how will the state government deal with issues that may arise between states law and recognizing the couples marriage? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| semi-fly wrote: |
| The Supreme Court will never touch the issue. Though I have to wonder how Federalism will apply in such issues when a happily married gay couple moves from one of the aforementioned states to say Texas or Arkansas (for posting purposes these two states do not recognize same sex marriage) how will the state government deal with issues that may arise between states law and recognizing the couples marriage? |
The federal Defense of Marriage Act purports to exempt the states from the Full Faith and Credit Clause, and by implication the Privileges and Immunities Clause(s), on this score. Eventually it will be challenged and the Supreme Court will have to examine it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
semi-fly
Joined: 07 Apr 2008
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hater Depot wrote: |
| semi-fly wrote: |
| The Supreme Court will never touch the issue. Though I have to wonder how Federalism will apply in such issues when a happily married gay couple moves from one of the aforementioned states to say Texas or Arkansas (for posting purposes these two states do not recognize same sex marriage) how will the state government deal with issues that may arise between states law and recognizing the couples marriage? |
The federal Defense of Marriage Act purports to exempt the states from the Full Faith and Credit Clause, and by implication the Privileges and Immunities Clause(s), on this score. Eventually it will be challenged and the Supreme Court will have to examine it. |
They may have to consider it at some point, but I highly doubt they can say that the government can say that a marriage is only a marriage if it is between a man and a woman since that would tend to force upon a nation of believers and non-believers a very Christian value. That alone would go against separation of church and state. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu May 07, 2009 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| semi-fly wrote: |
| Hater Depot wrote: |
| semi-fly wrote: |
| The Supreme Court will never touch the issue. Though I have to wonder how Federalism will apply in such issues when a happily married gay couple moves from one of the aforementioned states to say Texas or Arkansas (for posting purposes these two states do not recognize same sex marriage) how will the state government deal with issues that may arise between states law and recognizing the couples marriage? |
The federal Defense of Marriage Act purports to exempt the states from the Full Faith and Credit Clause, and by implication the Privileges and Immunities Clause(s), on this score. Eventually it will be challenged and the Supreme Court will have to examine it. |
They may have to consider it at some point, but I highly doubt they can say that the government can say that a marriage is only a marriage if it is between a man and a woman since that would tend to force upon a nation of believers and non-believers a very Christian value. That alone would go against separation of church and state. |
I rather think they'll invoke the Faith and Credit Clause before they use the Establishment Clause. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
