P.S. You might also want to take into consideration that Washington was a military leader, as well. It might put a different spin on what attitudes he might have. I don't think you can for any reason assume he would have opposed a ban on gay marriage. Nothing you have there seems to lead to that conclusion.

if the judge is following the constitution and honestly (notice i didn't subscribe to any particular ideology there) interprets the law as they are sworn to do, then there is no problem.

Then maybe you can explain to me the purpose of allowing people to have a say in something when one of the choices is already considered unconstitutional before it was even voted for and once it was voted for, we have someone like judge overturn it? It reminds me of the many times my mother asked me if I wanted to go to the store with her and when I said no she would say "well you are going anyways". So why did you ask?

You don't live in a democracy. You live in a republic. The responsibility for law falls on three branches - the executive, in the form of the president; the legislature, in the form of your senate and congress; and the courts.

Each is a check and a balance on the power of other two, with the court's special privilege being the interpretation of the law. Why does it have this power? Because those who work in the courts have the greatest experience with it and are therefore best qualified to define it.

The legislatures are refused the power to tamper with what the courts consider unconstitutional because the courts are entrusted first and foremost with ensuring the protection of the constitution. The legislative houses have responsibility over writing law and the executive oversees all and censures where appropriate.

Didn't they teach you this in school?

our democracy is NOT all about voting.

i just support giving equal status to same sex couples.

Liberal Democracy
Liberal democracy is a representative democracy along with the protection of minorities, the rule of law, a separation of powers, and protection of liberties (thus the name liberal) of speech, assembly, religion, and property. Conversely, an illiberal democracy is one where the protections that form a liberal democracy are either nonexistent, or not enforced.


18th and 19th centuries
Although not described as a democracy by the founding fathers, the United States has been described as the first liberal democracy on the basis that its founders shared a commitment to the principle of natural freedom and equality.[14] The United States Constitution, adopted in 1788, provided for an elected government and protected civil rights and liberties. However, in the colonial period before 1776, only adult white male property owners could vote; enslaved Africans, free black people and women were not extended the franchise. On the American frontier, democracy became a way of life, with widespread social, economic and political equality.[15] However the frontier did not produce much democracy in Canada, Australia or Russia. By the 1840s almost all property restrictions were ended and nearly all white adult male citizens could vote; and turnout averaged 60-80% in frequent elections for local, state and national officials. The system gradually evolved, from Jeffersonian Democracy to Jacksonian Democracy and beyond. In Reconstruction after the Civil War (late 1860s) the newly freed slaves became citizens with (in the case of men) the right to vote.

P.S. You might also want to take into consideration that Washington was a military leader, as well. It might put a different spin on what attitudes he might have. I don't think you can for any reason assume he would have opposed a ban on gay marriage. Nothing you have there seems to lead to that conclusion

When children are adopted, those protections and assurances do not need to be there; they have the protections of the court in the adoption process.

The Civil Rights movement was a very serious move to rectify a horrible injustice by people who were discriminated against. The "gay rights movement"

go tell that to mary cheney and her partner.

Hey SC...if you're going to talk about America, do it right. America is a representative republic not a democracy.

SC, I apologize. It would seem that what I was taught in school is now considered incorrect. From Wikipedia:

"none of our allies in europe have any ban on open homosexual people in the military. assuming all military are against it is false."

Assuming there isn't military bias against it, even in nations that allow it, is irresponsible. But, then, so is using a man from 200 years ago as a hand puppet to promote one's own morality...

I will ask you this straight up, Sean: do you support the same rights for polygamy or polyandry? Assuming that ONLY consenting adults are part of the relationship? IF not, Why not?