Social Issues

    Here’s two links on current social/legal issues in debate. My own view would fall with the “conservatives” on one of them, and with the “liberals” on the other (haha, I’ll make everybody mad at me tonight ;-), which says a lot about how useless those labels are…

  • AP: Canada to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

    On this first story I’ll probably surprise of my readers by saying I support the Canadian decision.

    It is not because I don’t believe in the traditional definition of marriage, but rather that I think the church’s definition of marriage and the state’s definition of marriage can and should be two seperate things.

    Churches I think have the right (and dare I say the duty) to define marriage among their own members according to their conregation’s/denomination’s standards. If anything I wish churches held engaged couples to higher standards… required premaritial counseling, etc.

    But the state is something different. Allowing gay people to marry, will insure that all people have equal rights under the law.

    For instance, let’s say that a homosexual man is in a horrible car accident and his partner goes to the hospital to see him. Under current law, his partner would have no right to see him. Certainly the hospital might let him visit but they would not have to let him in the same way that they would for a heterosexual spouse of one who is injured.

    Another example is inheritance. A homosexual couple might have bought a house together, but if they are not super-careful in the way they draw up the deed (and/or will), if one partner died, the other would not inherit the partner’s half but rather other family member’s.To me this is unfair.

    Let churches define marriage as they will, but as far as the government goes civil marriage should be right open to all.

  • AP/CBS: ‘Roe’ Wants Abortion Case Reversed
      The former plaintiff known as “Jane Roe” in the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case that legalized abortion sought to have the case overturned in a motion filed Tuesday that asks the courts to consider new evidence that abortion hurts women.

      Norma McCorvey, who joined the anti-abortion fight nearly 10 years ago and says she regrets her role in Roe v. Wade, said the Supreme Court’s decision is no longer valid because scientific and anecdotal evidence that has come to light in the last 30 years has shown the negative effects of abortion.

      “We’re getting our babies back,” a jubilant McCorvey said at a news conference while flanked by about 60 women, some who sobbed and held signs that read “I regret my abortion.”

      “I feel like the weight of the world has just been lifted off my shoulders,” said McCorvey, 55. . .

    I think the court should hear this case, because I don’t think the court has ever really wrestled with the true issues at stake in abortion… the rights of the mother to control her own body versus the rights of the unborn child to be secure in his or her rights of life and liberty.

    This is not an easy issue and I think the courts took the easy way out in Roe with using the right of privacy argument. Privacy was ONE issue in this case but it was not the only issue.