tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2283876274950645902.post4610222735909262921..comments2020-01-15T04:10:26.249-05:00Comments on The Political Doctor: Obama supports gay marriagePoliticalDoctorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01004730229112746172noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2283876274950645902.post-92002566041337974702012-05-11T10:36:43.883-04:002012-05-11T10:36:43.883-04:00Also, see the 2003 Massachusetts case, Goodridge v...Also, see the 2003 Massachusetts case, Goodridge v. Department_of_Public_Health.<br /><br />http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/conlaw/goodridge111803opn.pdf<br /><br />In particular, Justice Sosman's dissent is a case of these arguments:<br /><br />"Placed in a more neutral<br />context, the court would never find any irrationality in such an approach. For example, if the issue were<br />government subsidies and tax benefits promoting use of an established technology for energy efficient<br />heating, the court would find no equal protection or due process violation in the Legislature's decision not<br />to grant the same benefits to an inventor or manufacturer of some new, alternative technology who did not<br />yet have sufficient data to prove that that new technology was just as good as the established technology.<br />That the early results from preliminary testing of the new technology might look very promising, or that the<br />theoretical underpinnings of the new technology might appear flawless, would not make it irrational for the<br />Legislature to grant subsidies and tax breaks to the established technology and deny them to the still<br />unproved newcomer in the field."nybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06111907939712607618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2283876274950645902.post-91571453207054276762012-05-11T10:12:07.893-04:002012-05-11T10:12:07.893-04:00I agree with you completely, but I really don'...I agree with you completely, but I really don't think dismissing people by arguing that there's a "consensus" is a good way to go.<br /><br />The data is incredibly recent (most studies with adequate sample sizes appear to be < 10 years old) and I can easily find studies which purport to show things such as "slightly more than half of the lesbians reported that they had been abused by a female lover/partner", which can easily be used as arguments against allowing such relationships.<br /><br />Besides, with the use of the precautionary principle, any activities that present an uncertain potential for significant harm (which is defined nebulously, of course) should be prohibited, unless the proponent of the activity shows that it presents no appreciable risk of harm.<br /><br />I don't agree with this approach, but it's a argument that is considered valid in many other cases (see the left's love of environmental laws), so why can't it be considered a valid case here?<br /><br /><br />I do think this is a place where federalism shows how well it works. By having some states allowing gays to marry, while others ban it, we have many different "laboratories" in which we can then empirically see the outcomes. <br /><br />We were actually considering moving to Charlotte in the next few years but after they passed this law, we're probably not. As people vote with their feet and those places are seen as backward by a greater number of people, change will happen, but it will take time.nybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06111907939712607618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2283876274950645902.post-78651177132423635732012-05-10T21:22:18.103-04:002012-05-10T21:22:18.103-04:00http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting#Consen...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting#Consensus<br /><br />This is really the crux of the issue. If there were any legitimate basis to suggest that gay parents were worse parents, that would be one thing, but the research on the issue is clear that it is not "unknown" if role models of both genders are needed.PoliticalDoctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01004730229112746172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2283876274950645902.post-9058114611317208862012-05-10T16:11:51.201-04:002012-05-10T16:11:51.201-04:00Also - I support gay marriage, by getting the gove...Also - I support gay marriage, by getting the government out of the business of issuing licenses for what is essentially a private social contract. <br /><br />However, I do think that there are some arguments from a rational basis against it. These arguments (statist in nature) typically go something like:<br /><br />The state defining marriage as between a man and a woman allows the state to encourage biological reproduction in an environment that historically has led to positive outcomes for children. It is unknown if the outcomes would be as positive without both genders serving as role models for a child, and the precautionary principle should be applied. It also allows the state to define "households" for purposes of taxation, census enumeration, and reproductive policy (as in China). If people are allowed to enter into any form of social relationship they wish, they may choose relationships that are more difficult for the state to define than just two people "married".<br /><br />I think it's important to not just dismiss people who are against gay marriage as having arguments "without merit", but instead refute those arguments with fact and logic...nybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06111907939712607618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2283876274950645902.post-70678894026281932992012-05-10T15:56:08.840-04:002012-05-10T15:56:08.840-04:00It's too early for this to significantly affec...It's too early for this to significantly affect the election though - Obama was saving this for September. Now the story will be dead by mid-June/July. Probably a net gain for team Romney since it happened sooner rather than later.nybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06111907939712607618noreply@blogger.com