This is great news, and might well positively affect the legality of same-sex marriage in many other states in the near future. Moreover, legalizing same-sex marriage in these and the other states that have already legalized it may well positively affect the California Supreme Court's decision regarding the fate of the vote on Proposition 8.
New England states signaled an increasing willingness to sanction gay marriage on Wednesday as Maine legalized the practice and the New Hampshire Legislature voted to do the same.
If New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch signs the bill or lets it become law without his signature, his state would become the sixth overall to allow gay marriage and the fifth in New England. Rhode Island would be the only state in the region without such a law.
Maine Gov. John Baldacci, a Democrat who hadn't indicated how he would handle his state's bill, signed it shortly after the legislation passed the Senate on a vote of 21-13 - a margin not large enough to override a veto.
"In the past, I opposed gay marriage while supporting the idea of civil unions," Baldacci said in a statement read in his office. "I have come to believe that this is a question of fairness and of equal protection under the law, and that a civil union is not equal to civil marriage."
[For the full article, see here.]
4 comments:
Hi Jerry,
I don't support gay marriage on any level. I believe that the institution of marriage is intended for a man/woman relationship.
I do applaud the pioneering spirit of these small pockets in our country, however I may disagree with what they're doing.
Thanks for sharing your insight.
Ryan
Hi Ryan: Maybe one day you'll change your mind, and realize that Gay people have the same needs and rights that Straight people do, and are entitled to equal treatment under the law, and are not to be denied any civil right that Straight people enjoy. Best wishes, Jerry.
The struggle of moral absolutes and our current society. I would like to talk freely, the only agenda I have to push is that of truth and purity. I know that in God’s eyes that purity and a love for truth is a “fruit” that results from our relationship with him. In our society matters of Dogmatic tradition and ties to a “law based system” has left a sour taste in many’s mouth. The good news is that we are no longer placed beneath the strict stipulations of moses’ initial law that was important but not permanent. We are a people placed under a new covenant of grace that brings about the moral change that every person so longs for. In light of this, a delimma has arraived in our culture, a battling system of secular, religious, and new covenant ideoligies all wish to coexist. Is this coexistance possible, “opra-style?” How does one still admire purity and wish to embrace righeousness, when others see certain issues of purity to be a “threat” to their acceptance of what is the divinely acceptable. In other words, What is pure in gods eyes is being interpreted as failable by others. Sin is clearly stated as sin, many of these sins are presented as sin under the old covenant law. A life through christ under the new testament is feedom from the law; however, a life through christ makes all things new in ones spiritual persona. This newness brought about through crist has been wattered down by many as a “cliche” concept, but when it really occurs, changes happens in ones life: new motivations araise, new senses of purpose and identy come forth, desires and emotions are placed within their proper perspective, and the “new creation’s” agenda is in one accord with the holy spirit, who they have learned to relate and communicate with. All of this talk about newness is a great thing, and it brings to light something important: No we are not under the “law,” yet the law still has a sacred function. The law exposes sin and human inability, so that we will acknowledge sin as evil (anything that doesn’t reside in the heart of God) and turn to the “personal” aspects of Christ and the holy spirit to overcome. By using the new testament model, and personally becoming “one” in spirit with christ, the requirements of the Law will be fulfilled. So, the grace of christ under the new testament does not redifine sin as being acceptable, or nullify the acuracy of the old covenant judgements on sin. Paul even stated in his new testament letters (paraphrase) should I sin so that grace abounds, surely not. The new testament simply changes the objective of christianity to one of relationship, and freedom from sin is a wonderfull sideaffect. In light of all of this, the matter of covenential approach does apply to homosexuality. In all of my college English classes we have learned much about New-Literary methods of Interpretation. It is a latter 20th century method that has filtered into our society, and has greatly affected the interpretation of our constitution and the Bible. Basically, it allows one to assign a meaning to any document by analyzing its elements in any manner desired. “Original intent” of the document analyzed can be and is often disregarded. It is a great secular tool that is used to make any form of written standard subject for interpretation. Presupositions from this analytical sytem, naturalism, realism, and others have enabled “Christians” to compromise the obvious line that divides right and wrong. “God is love” and “the law isn’t applicable” are phrases that are true in one sense, but they are being used to recreate a system of homosexual Christianity that isn’t inspired or filled with the annointing of Christ. So what are the answers to the problem of Homosexuality? Should the scriptures be reinterpreted so that those in sin wont be left behind? I say that no sinner is beyond the reach of Christ. Homosexual’s don’t need to be spoon fed the old covenant untill theyre sick and full of shame, nor do they need to be kept in the absence of righteousness. They simply need the love of christ, and a reality of his presence that will lead them into the truth regarding the matter. Deception usually doesn’t hold volunteers captive. When one is decieved, he doesn’t know it. A system of compromise and reinterpretation that is far from God’s “original-intent” is fuel for deception, and in no way should be embraced by spiritual fathers. But “no one is perfect” don’t throw the “Baby out with the bathwater”, all has been spoken in defense of homosexual “love.” Love is a standard, not subject for rinterpretation. Corinthians tells us what love is, but it also tells us what it isn’t and what it “doesn’t.” In conclusion of all of this I would like to say a few things. I have been guilty of trying to surpress the homosexual agenda in the past by throwing law and shame at it. Corporately, I was not acting along. I believe that this approach to the problem has caused a “sub-society” of people who feel rejected and in need of defense. I do not wish to continue in this manner, nor do I wish to make gods “word” what I think it should be for the sake of sin justification. Overall, my standards are only where they need to be when they are the same as God’s standards that never change. I will pray and seek to love those who are confused, in homosexuality, and others who are without the spirit of God. Without bitterness in my heart, I will seek never to compromise the truths that god clearly presents before us. The only help that will bring freedom to the homosexual community is help that points to a non-cliche relationship with christ and the interaction with the holy spirit. That will take a true spirit led faith that goes beyond the conventions of traditional christianity.
Hi Anonymous: I think the crux of your comment is the following: “Original intent” of the document analyzed can be and is often disregarded." To try and understand the original intent of the authors is very difficult when it's 2,000 years removed from any event; when translation and contextual issues are problematic.
"Love" is the basis of the Christian life, and that is what we are dealing with when it comes to same-sex love and to acquisition of civil rights that all citizens deserve.
Also, just as there are Straight Christians there are Gay Christians, and that fact must never be denied!
Being Gay is not a sin, and there is nothing in Scripture to even suggest that it is, but one of the Ten Commandments states that we should not bear false witness, and those who demean or in any way condemn Gay people or refuse them fellowship in the Christian community are guilty of transgressing that Commandment, as well as disobeying the teachings of Jesus! Best wishes, Jerry.
Post a Comment