3 ms·
If anything, they'll push it back to the states to decide. I put zero probability of a Federal ban on marriage equality. My friends on the left always push for
by fixxer 10y ago
If anything, they'll push it back to the states to decide. I put zero probability of a Federal ban on marriage equality.
My friends on the left always push for universal, top down rulings on social issues. In reality, there are really good reasons historically for why groups move and congregate within the United States - they get better treatment and opportunity in different places. States rights is a safety net against political swings like we're dealing with and we should all support it not because we like what Alabama or Indiana wants, but because we want California or New York to be able to represent and manage itself.
- scarface74 10y agoThere is absolutely no defensible reason to not allow gay marriage. Who cares if some people have a religious reason for not approving of gay marriage? If they don't approve of it, don't do it. But freedom of religion should also be freedom from religion.
- fixxer 10y agoYeah, no issue with gay marriage in my view. The issue is where the decision needs to be rendered. I argue Federal rulings on X create a premise for rulings on Y and while you might really like the idea of X, it doesn't really matter to your life and it invites a negative impact from Y. Let X=gay marriage and Y=a state's self-determination of immigration law.
- scarface74 10y agoImmigration law is a matter of non citizens rights in the US. The federal government has the responsibility to protect citizens constitutional rights. Any law that discriminates against one person because of another persons religous beliefs is prima facie unconstitutional. Should the states have had the right to keep laws against miscegenation because someone objected to interracial marriage? What about states right when it came to Jim Crow laws?
- fixxer 10y agoMaybe? I wouldn't want to live in those states and I think that would be pervasive. Ultimately, economics would drive progress. All conjecture. If only social science was a real science and we could do independent trials.
- classicsnoot 10y agoTo buttress what @fixxer stated: i do think it should be allowed for states to have horrible rules and laws (anti-miscegenation, anti-gay, anti-white, etc). People have, and will continue, to vote with their feet. More poignantly, companies will vote with their foot print. If a majority of people in Arkansas want to establish the state as a White Majority Zone, democracy dictates that it must be so. Ditto for any other region or color.