That's a whole other question. If GWB wants to make a constitutional amendment, that's what makes it a constitutional issue. Other than that, you're right.
Matthew Small Web Developer American City Business Journals 704-973-1045 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Loathe [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 4:56 PM To: CF-Community Subject: RE: GitMo (Was: speaking of) Matt, What in the constitution, the supposed base document of all federal law, gives the federal government the right to come down either way? Shouldn't it at least be a states issue? Tim -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Small [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 4:33 PM To: CF-Community Subject: RE: GitMo (Was: speaking of) You can't divide everything so neatly, Gruss. I value liberty, and I have my own values of human decency. Sometimes those two things don't match. Sometimes they do. Sometimes one trumps the other. Sometimes the values of the whole trump the values of the individual, and vice-versa. But that's why there are votes, and that's liberty at work - the freedom to vote for who you want to represent you, and the ability to accept that sometimes you don't win. I wouldn't have voted for GWB, but I favor his stance on homosexual marriage. It doesn't take a Christian to have a viewpoint that doesn't accept homosexuality as a either a natural thing or to have a viewpoint that conflicts with your definition of liberty. It doesn't mean that I'm against personal liberty. Anybody can have sex with anybody they wish for all I care - laws don't change a thing. But my stance is against the legal acceptance of the act. Matthew Small Web Developer American City Business Journals 704-973-1045 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 4:16 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: GitMo (Was: speaking of) > Sam wrote: > I'm not a Christian so I'm an enemy according > to you. It's not necessarily being a Christian, it's believing that the morality the Church advocates should be law. This is Mr. Bush's core domestic policy. For example, Gay marriage. Those that value liberty would say if 2 sane adults want to have sex in private, let them. If they want to commit to each other and gain the benefits of marriage, let them. Those that oppose liberty, that seek to shackle others with their arbitrary morality, would say Gay Marriage is not only wrong, but those that wish to do it should be prevented. Mr. Bush would like to go so far as to make Gay Marriage constitutionally prohibited - use the constitution to discriminate amongst citizens. What right do I have to say that your lifestyle choices, given they don't inhibit mine, should be banned? To do so is the ultimate immorality. So it's not Christianity, it the belief that the State should impose an arbitrary morality on its citizens. Which you believe. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:163253 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54