Log in

No account? Create an account

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile
> the muted horn

July 15th, 2004

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
11:39 am - Good news...
From today's New York Times: "The Senate delivered a sound, and expected, defeat Wednesday to a proposed constitutional amendment to prohibit same-sex marriage, easily blocking a politically charged initiative that has been endorsed by President Bush and was a top priority of many of his socially conservative supporters."

Well, good for the Senate, say I.

(2 comments | Leave a comment)


[User Picture]
Date:July 15th, 2004 08:56 am (UTC)
One of Maine's senators issued a press release on the matter in which she very carefully (and in a much more diplomatic way than I'm about to paraphrase it) said, "OK, look, I hate the idea of gays getting married just as much as you do, but we can't just go amending the Constitution whenever something happens that we don't like. What we can do, however, is make it as inconvenient as possible for the deviants to have their way by setting things up so that a bewildering patchwork of different states' interpretations of the matter arises in short order."

One of the things Sen. Collins does say in her words, rather than my snarky rereading, is, "We must also not overreact to the decision of a single court in a single state by... stripping away from our states a power that they have exercised, for the most part wisely, for more than 200 years."

It's such a quandary. While I appreciate the backhandedness of the implied attack on Massachusetts there, and I certainly appreciate the senator's unwillingness to go modifying the Constitution for every piddling little controversy that comes down the pipe, her overall attitude is a bit disappointing. But then, she has a predominately conservative constituency, and senators are elected to represent their constituencies' interests.

(Oh, PS, I'm not sure I agree with the NYT's impression that it was a sound or easy defeat. According to Sen. Collins's press release, the motion to permit a vote on the subject was defeated 50-48. I am, however, impressed that 98 senators were actually there to vote.)
[User Picture]
Date:July 15th, 2004 10:11 am (UTC)
48 votes in favor of bringing the issue to the floor, when 60 were needed. I'd say that's a fairly solid defeat. (That, and 67 would've been needed for the amendment to pass the Senate.)

> Go to Top