Michigan Senators seek to amend State Constitution to ban gay marriages.

According to the Detroit Free Press – State looking to define marriage there’s a move to put a proposed amendment banning gay marriages before voters next year.  The effort is being led by state Sen. Alan Cropsey of DeWitt who is joined by (supposedly) liberal Democrat Rep. Triette Reeves of Detroit. Reeves is quoted as claiming not to be anti-gay, but pro-marriage.

Right. You’re pro-marriage, but only between a man and a woman. A better and more accurate statement would be: Reeves is pro-a-very-narrow-and-homophobic-definition-of-marriage. Someone who is truly pro-marriage wouldn’t want to limit it to one classification of couples.

I won’t even go into how much of an asshole I think Sen. Alan Cropsey is. Not only will this amendment ban recognition of gay marriages but it would outlaw businesses and communities from offering benefits to the partners of gay employees. Welcome to Michigan were open discrimination based on sexual orientation could soon be a part of our Constitution.

10 thoughts on “Michigan Senators seek to amend State Constitution to ban gay marriages.

  1. I FEEL THAT IF U LOVE SOMEONE REGARDLESS IF THEY ARE THE SAME SEX OR NOT, THEN THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO MARRY. THEY ARE HUMAN JUST LIKE ALL OF US. WHOSE DECISION IS IT IF THEY WANT TO MARRY OR NOT. PEOPLE JUST DONT WANT TO ACCEPT SOMETHING THAT ISN’T ‘NORMAL’.

  2. There is controversy in Massachusetts as they get ready to rule on whether same sex couples can marry.  Why is there controversy over something that causes no harm to anyone other than the one’s that make it harm?  This takes me back to black rights and segregaton….hello??  Free Country??  ….sorry…this is for a research paper I am writing on the rights of gays.  I cannont begin to express how much this angers me.  One girl in my class is reasearching if being gay is a phase…..  Having experience on this first hand, most of this seems quite ludacris.  It is not a phase, nor is it something they choose to cause controversy.  They are like anyone else…only their sexual preference is not the same.  That’s all.

  3. Bah, it doesn’t bother me. Marriage is a christian institution invented some couple thousand years ago to stimulate reproduction. Same sex couples can’t make babies obviously, so who cares? I mean seriously, they got civil unions. They asked for equal benefits, and they got it with civil unions. But now they want to bitch and moan like ungrateful bastards. You give a kid a cookie and he wants milk. They don’t need marriage. If they were so in love then they shouldn’t need a ritual that doesn’t apply to them to prove it.

    Seriously, get a life people and stop complaining.

  4. I really appreciate the effort you are making, but using profanity makes you look bad and kind of undermines your point. If you know what I mean.

  5. Only to people who give a shit about profanity.

    Mark Twain once commented to Rev. Joe Twichell, “My swearing doesn’t mean any more to me than your sermons do to you.”

  6. Obag, your definition of marriage betrays an obvious ignorance of history and law.

    Marriage was invented more than a couple of thousand years ago and is certainly not a Christian institution. People were getting married (and divorced and remarried) long before that particularly doomsday cult came into being, thousands of years before the birth of Christ. I’m sure this point has been made elsewhere on the site but even today marriage is not a Christian – or even a religious – institution but a legal one. Sure most people choose to be married by a religious sect, but many have a justice of the peace perform the ceremony, or have a secular celebrant do it, there is no way modern marriage can be limited to the Christian tradition.

    And neither can marriage be regarded as simply for reproduction. Today many married couples choose not to have children, many cannot have children for medical reasons, and non-married parents are a common sight. Marriage cannot be defined based upon whether the couple in question have children.

    As for civil unions, they are not the same thing as marriages, they are only allowable in a few areas and for the most part are not recognised outside of that area. I think that Vermont is the only place in the USA where civil unions can be made official, though I may be wrong.

    I’ve probably just wasted five minutes with this entry, oh well…

  7. In “The Nazi Persecution of Homosexuals” at http://www.infopt.demon.co.uk/nazi.htm is a quote by Reich Legal Director Hans Frank in 1938: “Particular attention should be addressed to homosexuality, which is clearly expressive of a dispositon opposed to the normal national community. Homosexual activity means the negation of the community as it must be constituted if the race is not to perish. That is why homosexual behavoir, in particular, merits no mercy.” Now that’s profanity! Also, there is a great paper by Prof. Boswell on “The Church and the Homosexual: An Historical Perspective, 1979” at http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
    wink

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.