View Single Post
Old 05-11-2004, 14:15:46   #40
Die Müfzwerge
Funkodrom's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Drowning in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry
Originally posted by Tau Ceti
While that may be true, the really shocking part is the willingness to constitutionally forbid it (whether we are talking about state or federal constitutions). I can live with people not wanting to pass laws allowing it, but a constitutional ban is simply barbaric - especially when it is even extended to civil unions/domestic partnerships and benefits thereof.
The governmental system works differently there. The way I understand it it was legal (ie. Proved not to be unconstitutional, therefore legal) unless they specifically voted to ban it. So the only way to not allow it is to ban it, it's not just illegal by default until you vote to allow it.

Here (the UK) I think it's illegal because the laws dealing with marriage deal with man married to woman, so they won't change unless Parliment specifically makes it legal.

I don't see why allowing the public to vote for banning it is worse than havnig it illegal due to ancient laws in the UK and not even having a vote to see if it should be made legal?

I've never been allowed to vote on whether same sex marriages should be legal or not and if I was, I'm not sure that the British public would vote (with me) to legalise it.
protein: Bryan Adams rocks
Blog - Band Müf Gigs 5th March BerkshireLive Aid
Funkodrom is offline