Vermont legalizes gay marriage with veto override

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090407/ap_on_re_us/gay_marriage_vermont

MONTPELIER, Vt. – Vermont has become the fourth state to legalize gay marriage — and the first to do so with a legislature’s vote.

The Legislature voted Tuesday to override Gov. Jim Douglas’ veto of a bill allowing gays and lesbians to marry. The vote was 23-5 to override in the state Senate and 100-49 to override in the House. Under Vermont law, two-thirds of each chamber had to vote for override.

The vote came nine years after Vermont adopted its first-in-the-nation civil unions law.

Sadly NH may be next.

I knew it was a matter of time for Vermont. Here in the Communist North you expect it. :banghead: The scary thing is that it passed in Iowa. :nope:

Woo! Let’s hear it for momentum!

It did not pass in Iowa. It has been forced upon the people of Iowa by a small group of 7 men and 1 woman.

I’m not really surprised. Depressed, but not surprised.

Well, I did what I could. I contacted my politicians so much; I’m sure they’re all sick to death of me, lol. :stuck_out_tongue:

Sheesh, it passed by one vote though. That’s really frustrating.

Ah momentum! That enternal cry.

Let’s see:

2000 years ago it looked like momentum would carry the Roman Empire forward till the end of time.

1500 years ago it looked like momentum would carry Islam forward and conquer the World.

500 years ago it looked like momentum would carry Protestants forward to take over the souls of Europe.

200 years ago it looked like momentum would carry The Enlightenment forward and blot out all religion with rationalism and humanism.

50 years ago it looked like momentum would carry Communism forward towards World domination.

And through all this momentums, The One Holy and Apostolic Church survived and flourished and never gave up.


I won’t place my bet on momentum.

Good for Vermont!

It never ceases to puzzle me when straight people get upset over these things. You probably won’t even notice anything has changed.

And it may well continue to do so. This isn’t a fight against the Church, it is a fight for freedom and equality, and in that context, I will place my bet on momentum.

And it never ceases to puzzle me when others assume that the people who get upset over these things must be straight.

Yes…let’s hear it for momentum!!! This battle for marriage equality will happen one state at a time…one small victory at a time…

There’s nothing to celebrate when this kind of radical egalitarianism conflicts so sharply with the common good.

“Radical egalitarianism”…it passed by one vote…that is radica!!!..it no way conflict with the common good…it IS for the common good that equal protection under the rule of law is observed.

I disagree, it can only be seen as positive for a small minority of people (estimated as ten percent of the population?). For everyone else, for society “at large,” gay marriage will be detrimental because it weakens the traditional family, the most fundamental social unit of our society, which is necessary for the formation of well-adjusted children.

I haven’t noticed a huge cry of outrage over the matter. I think gay marriage is simply a matter of fairness. Certainly it hurts neither me, nor society, if two men or two women marry.

Vermont did the right thing. I hope New Hampshire follows.

The states of Iowa and Vermont disagree with you.

This won’t affect today’s adults as we had the benefit of the traditional family structure as our model. However, it may well destory the family unit in coming generations. I couldn’t be more depressed about this. How the judicial and legislative minority can make such a radical change to the fabric of our society is totally depressing? If this continues, in 50 years the United States will be in very bad shape.

Agreed. Folks who get upset about the breakdown of the “traditional” family need to realize that while “traditional” may have appeared perfect on the surface, often this was not the case. “Family” can mean a lot of things - as long as there is love and support, that is all that matters. The sex/sexual orientation of the folks involved is/should not be an issue.

It’s not like this was adjudicated by 8-9 people. This was a VETO override by a duly-elected Legislature.

You simply can’t whine about “activism” on this one. I’m sure there are the few out there that think Legislators overstepped their bounds, but I heard no complaints when Legislatures voted the other way to resrtict same-sex marriage. This is exactly why we DONT need a Federal marriage amendment. A state Legislature has voted with overwhelming support for same-sex marriage. Others have voted against it. And Congress has used its power appropriately to regulate “Full Faith and Credit” between States regarding same-sex marriage. If VT doesn’t like this, then they can kick out all the reps and vote new ones in.

NY, NJ, NH, and probably one or two others will enact legislation to this same effect. CA is working on another voter-based reform to overturn Prop 8. People in other states have their legislation or Amendments restricting this.

The REAL problems are going to arise when same-sex married couples in these states travel with, or bring their children into another state that does not recognize same-sex marriage and same-sex adoption/parenting. Congress needs to act and make sure Full Faith and Credit is given to other States’ adoption processes, at least in non-residential, non-moving situations (travel and Commerce).

I actually didn’t say that they *must *be straight, did I? All I said that it puzzles me when straight people get upset over these sorts of things.

While I’m on the subject, though, it puzzles me much less when closeted homosexuals oppose secular gay rights. I can see (and have had personal experience with) the issues there.

now this is just a mixture of opinion and theory but here goes:

maybe they realize that its the right thing to do. i’m all for equal Rights, but a lot of the ‘rights’ these people want are privliges, demands, or exceptions for themselves. like in gay marriage everyone has equal rights-any of age single man can marry any consenting of age woman that he isnt closely related to. 1 rule for everybody. what gays are pushing for isnt equality its extra. and yes it was the gay agenda that pushed for this not just the legislature, thats why the bills author ‘proposed’ to his partner there in the capital building as soon as they overrode the veto.

how about gays that choose to remain celibate because they know its the right thing to do. personaly thats a position i support fully, and i know a few forum members have taken it as their choice. does that decesion puzzle you too?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.