News and Opinion for Democrats Against Bush - Part I b
Principles of States' Rights Favor Massachusetts
Pt. I b BUSH'S CONGRESS
NEO-CONSERVATIVES' ULTIMATE GOAL
RIGGING ELECTIONS
------ Reforms needed
-- Corrupt Redistricting
---- Texas
---- Colorado
---- Pennsylvania
-- Rigged E-Voting?
---- Diebold For Bush
-- Delayed Disclosures
RAW POWER TACTICS
-- Bullying to Win
---- Threatening Dems
---- Bribing Republican
-- Excluding Democrats
---- 11th-Hour Bills
---- 1-Vote Victories
LOOTING the FUTURE
-- Driving Up Deficit
-- Extra Pork in Bills
-- $87 bill. Blank Check
BAD BILLS
-- Energy Bill
-- Medicare Bill
-- Spending Bill
WHO BENEFITS?
-- Wealthy Interests
-- Cheney's Cronies
-- Bush Camp'n Donors
-- Gun Lobby
WHAT ARE WE LOSING?
-- Privacy Rules
-- Academic Freedom
---- at the U. of Wash.
-- States' Rights on..
---- Air Quality
---- Antispam Rules
---- ID Protection
---- Gay Marriage
---- Scholarships
STATES FIGHT BACK
-- Brandeis's Support

" The calls from the right for a national marriage law aren't about shielding other states from being forced to honor gay unions conducted in Massachusetts or Vermont or Hawaii. Congress cut off that possibility seven years ago by passing the Defense of Marriage Act ....

But conservatives now want a federal law - or better yet, a constitutional amendment - that would block the states from deciding for themselves who gets to marry whom. ...

The principles for mediating between state and federal authority come down squarely on the side of Massachusetts's authority to decide whether to legalize gay unions inside its borders. It's one thing for Congress or a federal court to stop a state from refusing to grant rights guaranteed by the Constitution, as the Supreme Court did in Loving. It's another to say a state can't grant more rights than are available under federal law.  "

Washington Post

Trading places over gay marriages

The complete article is currently (3/25/04) available on the Washington Post website at-- http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A5293-2003Nov21?language=printer [found through a Google search by article title on the same date]


By EMILY BAZELON

Wednesday, November 26, 2003 -- It took conservatives about two minutes to call for Congress to outlaw gay marriage across the land after the Massachusetts high court's decision making way for same-sex unions. Liberals, on the other hand, congratulated the state court for boldly doing its own thing. In other words, the right and the left quickly swapped sides in the debate over when federal power should give way to state sovereignty. ...

Emily Bazelon is a senior editor at Legal Affairs magazine.

2003 The Washington Post Company

http://www.gazettenet.com/story.cfm?id_no=11260057

.

Enter supporting content here

 FAIR USE NOTICE  
  This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.