tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14457001.post1667951158223823853..comments2024-01-31T09:33:05.146-08:00Comments on Two World Collision: Committed Couples Both Gay and StraightErichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03948061964482528393noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14457001.post-15381911412480707462008-07-03T21:56:00.000-07:002008-07-03T21:56:00.000-07:00magandang ooh maga say e yo. Did i say that right...magandang ooh maga say e yo. Did i say that right? Hi. bah ah lum na. Did i say that right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14457001.post-43962907458616688932008-06-17T10:52:00.000-07:002008-06-17T10:52:00.000-07:00Hi Ally,Thank you very much for your comments abou...Hi Ally,<BR/><BR/>Thank you very much for your comments about the blog and the issue/journey that many Christians experience. Your love, support, and hospitality makes a difference!<BR/><BR/>In regards to my opinion about the courts and legislation, I'm planning on writing another post with excerpts from the Supreme Court's majority decision. So that'll be posted soon. <BR/><BR/>My initial thoughts are that I think there's a distinction between judges creating a law where none existed before and judges interpreting existing law.<BR/><BR/>I don't believe, in this particular case, that the Supreme Court was creating new law. In my opinion, they examined existing laws regarding marriage and domestic partnership and ruled that providing differential treatment of straight couples (marriage) and gay couples (domestic partnership) is unconstitutional. They interpreted existing law and ruled that having separate designations is unconstitutional. In that context, they explain that all people are afforded "equal dignity and respect".<BR/><BR/>I also think that in the Supreme Court's interpreting of existing law, their conclusions about the constitutionality of certain laws or provisions has the effect of change that can be perceived like it's a new law. <BR/><BR/>But i don't think it's new law. I think it's the court performing its function of ensuring the constitutionality of law. The Legislature writes law, the Supreme Court interprets law, the Executive enforces law. With these separation of powers, we ensure that the majority of people cannot infringe on the rights of the minority through legislation. There could either be an executive veto of such legislation, or a judicial determination that certain legislation is unconstitutional.<BR/><BR/>So, in a nutshell, that's my view of this. I'd also note though, that while the Supreme Court's majority decision takes effect, there were dissenting judges in the minority that did think the others were overstepping their bounds.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your thoughts!Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03948061964482528393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14457001.post-65749802640301726782008-06-16T14:47:00.000-07:002008-06-16T14:47:00.000-07:00Hi, I've been reading your blog for awhile now and...Hi, I've been reading your blog for awhile now and I'd like to say that I think you've got good thoughts on what it truly means to be a [gay] Christian. I put gay in brackets because I believe that being gay doesn't in anyway negate the fact you are a Christian. I realize many people [Christians] would disagree but I can't bring myself to believe that a God who is all-loving would reject a significant portion of the population simply because of their sexuality. I'm not gay but I do know what it's like to be an outsider in the church setting and reading through your blog has been a help in some of my struggles. So thank you for that.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I wanted to ask your opinion on the matter of California legalizing same-sex marriage. This was a decision brought on by the courts and not legislation. While I do think that there should not be any law prohibiting gay-marriage, it's technically not the court's job to make laws, though they have been doing that for quite some time now. Do you see this as problematic or not? I am just curious.<BR/><BR/>Thank you for your time, and thank you even more for this blog.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com