…you believe it is unnecessary to amend the constitution because Virginia statutes have prohibited same-sex marriages for 30 years and civil unions and other legal agreements between same-sex couples for the last three years without any legal challenge.
Technorati Tags: Virginia Marriage Amendment, Marshall Newman Amendment
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
All of three years with no challenge? Not enough. And statutes for 30 years? I’m sure that NJ and MA had laws against gay marriage too. Thirty years is nothing.
Let the people decide. Their reps in Richmond have voted to add this amendment to the Constitution, now the people can seal the deal. Or not.
Jane – NJ did NOT have any statute against gay marriage. If you had read my previous post (as well as tons of others) on the subject you would know that.
And the reps did NOT vote to add the amendment to the constitution BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO SUCH POWER! The ONLY thing they can do is vote to put it in front of the people.
You do yourself and other amendment supporters no favors by making such false claims.
Sorry. Ok, our reps supported it enough to let the people vote on the amendment. It was our reps who put it on the ballot!
I can honestly say that I have no worries about this amendment passing.
The problem is, people have seen MA and NJ, and have decided it IS necessary.
Jack – you’re full of it. The laws in MA and NJ don’t apply here. In fact, the NJ decision specifically pointed out Virginia as being a state in which such a decision could not take place.
Argue from a position of truth instead of spreading lies.
Vivian — I never said they did apply here. I only said that people have seen what the MA and NJ courts have done, and concluded that an amendment was necessary to prevent that here. That is not a lie.
As for “it can’t happen here,” who would have thought that the USSC would say the 1st Amendment doesn’t apply to political speech in the last days of an election? One simply cannot know what a judge will or will not do.
BTW, even the Washington Post (no bastion of conservative thought) calls it a “Same-Sex Marriage Ban.” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900863.html)