Same-Sex Marriage
Posted at 10:35am on Jun. 19, 2008 Tolerance and tyranny.
By Paul J Cella
Only a man of uncommon obtuseness could fail to predict this. In New Jersey, a homosexual couple wants to get married on a pavilion owned by a Methodist organization.
When Bernstein and Paster asked to celebrate their civil union in the pavilion, the Methodist organization said they could marry on the boardwalk — anywhere but buildings used for religious purposes. In other words, not the pavilion. [Rev. Scott] Hoffman says there was a theological principle at stake.
“The principle was a strongly held religious belief that a marriage is between a man and a woman,” Hoffman says. “We’re not casting any aspersions or making any judgments. It’s just, that’s where we stand, and we’ve always stood that way, and that's why we said no.”
The refusal came as a shock to Bernstein, who says Ocean Grove has been revived by the gay community.
“We were crushed,” she says. “I lived my whole live, fortunately, without having any overt prejudices or discrimination waged against me. So while I knew it was wrong, I never knew how it felt. And after this, I did know how that felt. It was extremely painful.” [. . .]
So the couple filed a complaint with New Jersey’s Division of Civil Rights, alleging the Methodists unlawfully discriminated against them based on sexual orientation. Attorney Lawrence Lustberg represents them.
“Our law against discrimination does not allow [the group] to use those personal preferences, no matter how deeply held, and no matter — even if they’re religiously based — as a grounds to discriminate,” Lustberg says. “Religion shouldn’t be about violating the law.”
Do I even need to tell you which side the court found for? Read on.
Posted in Christianity | Culture | Liberty | Same-Sex Marriage | Tolerance | Tyranny — Comments (100)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 7:31pm on May 23, 2008 Mathematics are Fun!
By Ben Domenech
GetReligion posts this excellent find:
According to the headline in the print edition, “Californians slimly reject gay marriage.” The Times website’s front page says, “Californians reject gay marriage by a bit.”
And the online version headline is:
Times Poll: Californians narrowly reject gay marriage
Voters also back a proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex unions, a new Times/KTLA survey shows.Los Angeles Times staff writer Cathleen Decker writes the story about this narrow support for an amendment to ban same-sex marriage. Here’s how she begins:
By bare majorities, Californians reject the state Supreme Court’s decision to allow same-sex marriages and back a proposed constitutional amendment aimed at the November ballot that would outlaw such unions, a Los Angeles Times/KTLA Poll has found.
Italics mine. There are four paragraphs of narrative before we get to the numbers:
Either way, the poll suggests the outcome of the proposed amendment is far from certain. Overall, it was leading 54% to 35% among registered voters.
Yes, you read that right. In the Los Angeles Times newsroom, 19 percentage points constitute slim, narrow, bare majorities. Gosh, I wonder how the story would be played if the opposite results were found. I know, as Barbie says, that math is hard.
Posted at 9:47am on May 16, 2008 The California Situation
By Ben Domenech
The California Supreme Court's decision to overturn the traditional definition of marriage continues the voters vs. the court dance that's been going on now for a decade. But the polling data on the ballot issue, which will put the question to the voters of whether to amend the state constitution this November, actually still looks like it has a better than average chance of passing...likely not by the overwhelming margin it did in 2000, when Prop 22 received 61 percent of the vote, but by a decent margin nonetheless.
It says a great deal that Gov. Schwarzenegger has twice vetoed the legislature's attempt to pass a same-sex marriage measure. While a social liberal like Schwarzenegger might naturally be predisposed to allow such a policy, the will of the voters is still strong enough to prevent him from doing so - he wants to pass the buck to the voters. Which is, let's face it, the right decision - we'll see if the voters respond again. More reax here.
Posted at 1:18pm on May 15, 2008 California Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage
By Robert A. Hahn
The California Supreme Court overturned a ban on gay marriage Thursday, paving the way for California to become the second state where gay and lesbian residents can marry.
CBS 5
UPDATE (Dan McLaughlin): Howard Bashman has the breakdown of the 4-3 decision, which apparently rests on state constitutional grounds and thus can't be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, here along with links to the 172-page opinion.
Comments are open.
Posted in Culture | gay marriage — COMMENTS / Read More
