Comments on: I support the rights of states to choose, unless that doesn’t work out http://themoderatevoice.com/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/ An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:28:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: runasim http://themoderatevoice.com/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/comment-page-1/#comment-137661 runasim Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:37:51 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/#comment-137661 Jazz, <br>The following is not meant for you personally.. It's a reaction to our political culture.<br>----------------------<br> I'm getting more than a little tired of the perpetual flip-flop hunt.<br>This is only one of many, many blog posts devoted to the subject, of flip-flops. and most of them are facile off-the-cuff 'gotcha' type of commentary.There is seldom any evidence of research or more than momentary thought involved. <br><br>This is the kind of thing which breeds cynicism about politics, IMO.. <br><br> . Jazz,
The following is not meant for you personally.. It's a reaction to our political culture.
———————-
I'm getting more than a little tired of the perpetual flip-flop hunt.
This is only one of many, many blog posts devoted to the subject, of flip-flops. and most of them are facile off-the-cuff 'gotcha' type of commentary.There is seldom any evidence of research or more than momentary thought involved.

This is the kind of thing which breeds cynicism about politics, IMO..

.

]]> By: runasim http://themoderatevoice.com/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/comment-page-1/#comment-137660 runasim Tue, 01 Jul 2008 19:16:08 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/#comment-137660 I don't see a contradiction, either.<br><br>A panel discussion on C-Span revealed that there are (were?) some gay activists advising against a fight over terminology (marriage vs. union). They feel that a battle over words is a distraction over the larger battle for giving civil unions absolutely all the rights and protections of marriage. In other words, substance is more important than appearance. <br>This approach leaves the door open to future developments and future battles.<br><br>That's a whole different kettle of fish than banning marriage.<br>A ban shuts the door on the future. Period. I don't see a contradiction, either.

A panel discussion on C-Span revealed that there are (were?) some gay activists advising against a fight over terminology (marriage vs. union). They feel that a battle over words is a distraction over the larger battle for giving civil unions absolutely all the rights and protections of marriage. In other words, substance is more important than appearance.
This approach leaves the door open to future developments and future battles.

That's a whole different kettle of fish than banning marriage.
A ban shuts the door on the future. Period.

]]> By: Degrance http://themoderatevoice.com/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/comment-page-1/#comment-137659 Degrance Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:13:53 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/#comment-137659 I agree with GreenDreams. I see no contradiction in the two statements you refer to. In fact they seem entirely consistent. I agree with GreenDreams. I see no contradiction in the two statements you refer to. In fact they seem entirely consistent.

]]> By: aba23 http://themoderatevoice.com/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/comment-page-1/#comment-137658 aba23 Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:27:34 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/#comment-137658 Well, first, "marriage" is one thing and fully equal rights and benefits (as might or might not exist in civil unions) are another (incidentally, the Supreme Court of NJ and I don't believe that, but he might), so that's one way in which the statements above are at least facially consistent.<br><br>It does get stickier looking at the California situation because their existing civil union law did confer all such rights and benefits as the state could confer. But many significant ones exist at the federal level. So, if anything, his new statement seems to be expanding his support for civil unions to federal recognition, perhaps. A change, but hardly the 9.0 difficulty dive you characterize.<br><br>Moreover, it seems to me, his opposition to constitutional amendments addressing these matters is based on the fact that they tend to be driven be people not protecting their own rights, but rather seeking to deprive others of similar ones (or, worse, politically motivated to drive a wedge between Americans), that is "discriminatory or divisive efforts," as he put it.<br><br>Notwithstanding all of that, why can't he have a position on the issue AND YET respect states to make their own decision? Isn't that the nature of federalism when the supremacy clause, fundamental rights, or other constitutional constraints aren't implicated? Well, first, “marriage” is one thing and fully equal rights and benefits (as might or might not exist in civil unions) are another (incidentally, the Supreme Court of NJ and I don't believe that, but he might), so that's one way in which the statements above are at least facially consistent.

It does get stickier looking at the California situation because their existing civil union law did confer all such rights and benefits as the state could confer. But many significant ones exist at the federal level. So, if anything, his new statement seems to be expanding his support for civil unions to federal recognition, perhaps. A change, but hardly the 9.0 difficulty dive you characterize.

Moreover, it seems to me, his opposition to constitutional amendments addressing these matters is based on the fact that they tend to be driven be people not protecting their own rights, but rather seeking to deprive others of similar ones (or, worse, politically motivated to drive a wedge between Americans), that is “discriminatory or divisive efforts,” as he put it.

Notwithstanding all of that, why can't he have a position on the issue AND YET respect states to make their own decision? Isn't that the nature of federalism when the supremacy clause, fundamental rights, or other constitutional constraints aren't implicated?

]]> By: GreenDreams http://themoderatevoice.com/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/comment-page-1/#comment-137657 GreenDreams Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:21:50 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/20749/i-support-the-rights-of-states-to-choose-unless-that-doesnt-work-out/#comment-137657 Amending the constitution is a bigger deal than legislation or executive order. I don't have a problem with this. Obama might oppose amending the US Constitution and state constitutions FOR gay marriage too. What's wrong with that? Amending the constitution is a bigger deal than legislation or executive order. I don't have a problem with this. Obama might oppose amending the US Constitution and state constitutions FOR gay marriage too. What's wrong with that?

]]>