Quote:
Originally Posted by YOhio
I forgot that you're still concerned about a marriage amendment. IMO, that's about as politically practical as a Right to Life amendment. Strategically SSM supporters should hope that the marriage amendment picks up noticable steam as it would force those the fence sitters to take a side. Even a 50/50 split would be a victory for the SSM supporters, ensuring the status quo where SSM would be determined at a state level.
I could certainly live with this matter remaining a state's rights issue. As it currently stands, I see it as an ideal solution.
I do warn you from getting too smug about the progressivism of your fellow Washingtonians. Your state passed DOMA legislation in 1998 and it has been upheld by the WA Supreme Court.
|
Let me see if I can jog your memory a little further. The debate du jour arose because of the obo player's opposition to the LDS Church's stance on the amendment. I agree the amendment is probably dead in the water. But the obo player was burned at the stake because of his objection to it taking that political position. The amendment's virtual death is another good reason why they LDS Church should have stayed out of the whole thing.
Outside King County we are not so enlightened on social issues. I will readily admit that.