… you believe the so-called Marriage Amendment goes too far. This amendment goes far beyond existing state law to ban any and all legal recognition of relationships between all unmarried couples.
Technorati Tags: Marshall Newman Amendment, Virginia Marriage Amendment
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
And if you do, you believe incorrectly. The expanation written by the A.G. and approved by the legislature says that this amendment does not invalidate contracts between individuals.
This is what Democrats usually call “fear mongering” when done by Republicans.
You’ve crossed the line, Jack, with the first line of your comment. I and no one here have not attacked you for your beliefs. You cannot attack others for theirs. That is unconscionable and I demand an apology.
The fact is that more than 200 lawyers disagree with the AG’s “opinion” is enough proof for me and many others that there will be consequences to this amendment.
The AG explanation violates the neutrality laws. The Republican-controlled legislature approved it anyway.
“But you have just proven what I’ve suspected: there is no logical reason for supporting this amendment, only the emotional one of the social conservatives who somehow think that their morality is superior.” — vjp
I did not intend to attack anyone — I only said they were incorrect, as you have done on occasion. (In fact, you did not even say YOU believed it; you only posed it as a hypothetical.) I was unaware that this particular belief was a matter of faith. I have never attacked anyone for his faith or lack thereof. I was under the impression that this particular belief was a conclusion based on facts and logic, and I produced facts and logic contrary to that conclusion. No offence was intended, and I am sorry I offended you.
In any case, the opinions of those “concerned lawyers and legal scholars” are just that — opinions. The legislature-approved A.G. opinion is evidence of intent, which carries much greater weight in court.
And the law school you graduated from was….?
Like usual, you are mixing apples and oranges.
The legislature did not approve the AG’s opinion. It was issued separately. The Republican-controlled legislature approved the explanation.
A real attorney will have to weigh in on what the weight of that explanation is.
And for the record, that quote of mine did not attack anyone’s beliefs, whether faith-based or logic-based.
From which law school did Lincoln graduate?
“Do not let school get in the way of your education.” -Samuel Clemens
Didn’t Lincoln have to pass a bar exam to practice law? He certainly would have to today. I stayed at Holiday Inn, but that doesn’t make me a doctor. What credentials do you have to practice law or make legal judgements?
BS — Yes, Lincoln did pass the bar, but he did not attend law school. It is not necessary to go to school to learn about a subject. However, the ABA has changed the rules and now requires law school graduation before one is allowed to take the bar exam. It is, in essence, a guild.
Let me flip your last question around a bit. If the people cannot understand the laws, what credentials do the lawmakers have to be making them? That is, in fact, one of Vivian’s complaints about the proposed amendment — that it is not clear. Speaking for myself only, I find it perfectly clear. But then, I find the words, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” perfectly clear, too, and we’re still arguing that one 200 years later.
“Lawyers making laws is like doctors making diseases.” 🙂
Many of them don’t! That is precisely why there is opposition to this amendment! It is poorly written among other concerns.
“A stitch in time saves nine.” Benjamin Franklin
Were the 1st, 2nd, and 10th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution poorly written, too? We’re still arguing over them.