I thought Republicans are in favor of limiting the power of the fed. govt., and letting the states decide most issues on their own
2006-06-19 11:14:27 · 16 answers · asked by Top 99% 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
W - your goat notwithstanding, the issue is WHO should define marriage, not HOW it should be defined
Alex - Many states have amended their Constitutions defining marriage as btw a man and a woman. No state judge can overturn that. If you are concerned about federal judges, no federal judge has ever overturned a state law or const. amendment defining marriage btw a man and a woman. So your concern is completely unfounded. "Activist Judge" is a talking point with no substance. Cite an example
2006-06-19 11:40:19 · update #1
Should we federalize divorce, child support, etc. as well?
2006-06-19 11:42:57 · update #2
Because they are hypocritical. They supposedly believe in states rights except when it doesn't suit their conquest of the political structure of America. They'll fly this subject around to solidify their base, the uneducated conservative, evangelical, redneck so they vote for them, then do nothing about it until they bring it up again in the 2008 election.. Their base is played for fools every two years on God, guns, and gays, and they still don't realize they're being played for fools. The abortion issue is another one. What have the Republicans done about any of these topics except bring them up every two years to rally the ignorant base?
2006-06-19 11:25:36 · answer #1 · answered by Pop D 5 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Because federal law mandates that all states have to honor each other. Whatever passes in one state must be recognized in every state.
Also, states don't have the power to redefine marriage. Marriage has one meaning. Deciding to call mud chocolate doesn't make mud taste any better.
One last bit; none of those states are making the decision by ballot. They are being made by the judicial branch, which is an abuse of the Constitution. Since when do a handful of judges get to invent law for the everyone, just because they think its a good idea? Attempting to redefine marriage would never pass at the ballot box.
2006-06-19 11:32:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no there are two reasons. first one is that the law that calls for states to recognize other states acts. forget what it is called but say you live in Ohio and you have an Ohio drivers license and get pulled over in Texas. well Texas has to recognize your license as legal. otherwise as you drove ac cross the country you would need a drivers license for each state.so if a gay person gets married in Mass. then all the other states must give it due prudence.second is that of activist judges as stated above . unless a state chances its Constitution then any judge can overturn the law. by giving the states the right not to reconize other states gay marriage is what the amendment is about. giving the power to the states.
2006-06-19 12:21:35 · answer #3 · answered by rap1361 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am against gay marriage--I'll just admit that up front. It's a good question you have asked, and here is the answer: If I were a lesbian and I married another woman in oh let's say Massachusetts and we decided to move to oh let's say Texas, would our union still be recognized? Would we still receive the same benefits? The answer is NO. This type of conflict has brought up the need for a constitutional amendment for marriage, regardless of what it is.
2006-06-19 12:07:19 · answer #4 · answered by musicqueen_yana 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Republicans want it left up to the voters of the state to decide whether to allow gay marriage. Not one states' citizens have voted to allow same sex marriage, however, many states have constitutional amendments to the state constitution banning same sex marriage. FEDERAL judges are usurping their power and invalidating the will of entire states. Marriage is not even mentioned in the constitution, so therefore is a states' right decision.
2015-03-31 11:30:25 · answer #5 · answered by Claude 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its not just republicans i run across democrars that feel the same way and they wonder why there party is so off issue of morals.
This issue of gay marriage is a very important . We as good moral people can not allow states to go down the unmoral path.
Just thank about it if children grow up thinking gay marriage is normal that would lead to more gay marriages and decaying of our society and the end of man kind over time.
2006-06-19 11:39:35 · answer #6 · answered by osirassun6 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually Maat Republicans are in favor of states defining Marriage. And several states have voted against same sex marriage in the previous elections.
What the republicans do not want.. and this is important so listen up so yuou don;t mess up again.. is for Actavist judges to define marriage. big difference...
2006-06-19 11:23:05 · answer #7 · answered by alexg114 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How can you redefine marriage when it's defined already as the union between a man and a woman? States should decide on their own but they should also do the right thing instead of the ridiculous!
2006-06-19 11:19:49 · answer #8 · answered by toughguy2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Republicans and Democrats as a majority want to define marrage as a union between a man and a woman. Other than the traditional aspects of such a union, gay couples don't give birth to future voters.
2006-06-19 12:32:25 · answer #9 · answered by Gordon K 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because if states start allowing gay marriage and people realize the world doesn't end, opposition to it will fall away.
2006-06-19 11:18:48 · answer #10 · answered by James 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋