| Former Whitewater prosecutor says Proposition 8 about voters |
|
|
| By Bob Allen | ||
| Tuesday, February 10, 2009 | ||
|
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (ABP) -- The controversy over California's Proposition 8 is larger than homosexuality, Kenneth Starr, lead counsel for a group set to argue before the state's Supreme Court in favor of upholding the ban on same-sex marriage March 5, told religious broadcasters Feb. 10.
"There is certainly a fundamental right to marriage," Starr said. "The Supreme Court has so said, and it's deeply rooted in our traditions, but we regulate marriage. Plural marriage, which is lawful in 28 countries that are members of the United Nations, would not be recognized. There are many, many regulations -- age regulations, et cetera." Starr said what is being argued in the case is not the definition of marriage, but whether the people have power to amend the state constitution to overturn a specific decision of the California Supreme Court. "It's a very important, nonetheless different, issue than the underlying constitutional issue of the right to marry someone of the same sex," he said. Nadine Strossen, former president of the American Civil Liberties Union, compared Proposition 8 to laws in 16 states that formerly had deep-rooted traditions of preventing interracial marriage. "It has broader implications far beyond the gay-marriage debate," she said. "It has broader implications for religious people in particular, and the issue is whether the people of California, by a bare majority of those who turn out to vote on a particular issue, can revise the California Constitution to take away what has been held to be a fundamental right." Strossen said the constitutional question is whether it rather takes a super-majority process to take away fundamental rights, such as two-thirds vote of both houses of the legislature. "One of the many friend-of-the-court briefs that was filed on our side was filed by a very broad array of religious organizations saying we have to be very careful, because if the people of this state by a bare majority vote can take away fundamental rights -- can take away equality rights -- from an unpopular minority group, then we have to worry that can be a power that can be used against religious communities," she said. -30- Bob Allen is senior writer for Associated Baptist Press.                 Comments (5)
 TomWins
written by Ken, February 11, 2009
"You cannot legislate morality"? Isn't that what segregationists used to say back in the fifties and sixties? It was a cop-out then, and it's a cop-out now. Every law legislates morality.
I agree it's a sad day when states have to spell out that marriage is between a man and a woman. Common sense used to tell us that. Unfortunately, common sense has become a thing of the past. unreasonable
written by Dr. J, February 11, 2009
It seems unreasonable to me that the vast majority of Americans, who are heterosexual Christians, must chuck their traditional values to accommodate a radical fringe group.
Red Herring
written by Sparklingred, February 13, 2009
I second TomWins' sentiments. The important focus for Christians is to love and help others.
If the job of Christians is to legislate in order to destroy the separation between church and state, what would be next on the list? Make it illegal for heterosexual couples to live together outside of marriage? That's a sexual sin, supposedly. If you care passionately about legislating against gays but ignore heterosexuals' misbehaviour, then that shows that your issue is a grudge against homosexuality, not a consistent concern for biblical morality. silly argument written by Dr. J, February 16, 2009
What legislation is not about morality? There is nothing in Prop 8 about legislating homosexual behavior. It simply defines marriage. A definition, by the way, that has centuries of tradition and held by the vast majority of Americans.
Readers alone are responsible for the content of the comments they post here. The comments are subject to the site’s terms and conditions of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of the ABP News. Readers whose comments violate the terms of use may have their comments removed or all of their content blocked from viewing by other users without notification.
Write comment
|
||
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Baptists
- SBC leaders criticize Beck's choice of words, but say he has a point
- BWA leaders hear thanks for quake relief, requests for more aid & prayers
- CBF seeks funds, volunteers for long-term Haiti relief
- Ala. CBF leader McDougal returns to pastorate with call to Dallas church
- Dallas church announces gay-friendly stance, endangering BGCT affiliation
Nation
- Federal appeals court says Pledge of Allegiance is constitutional
- Faith leaders say abortion provisions adequate in health-care bill
- Supreme Court accepts case testing limits of free speech
- In Texas, Religious Right loses fight with national curriculum implications
- Supreme Court declines Okla. county’s attempt to display 10 Commandments
World
| |
What would Jesus do? Pass laws or heal the sick?
The Mormons and Focus on the Family could have done much more good for families with the millions of dollars they spent rather than temporarily taking away the right of same-sex couples to marry.