It’s been a busy week for GLBT couples and families - the Vermont legislature overrode the governor’s veto, making Vermont the 4th state in the union; Washington, DC’s council voted to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere and, finally, this note about the White House Easter Egg roll:
WASHINGTON (AP) _ The White House is allocating tickets for the upcoming Easter Egg Roll to gay and lesbian families as part of the Obama administration’s outreach to diverse communities.
Families say the gesture shows that the new Democratic administration values them as equal to other families. And for many, being included in the annual tradition _ dating to 1878 _ renews hope that they will have more support in their quest for equal rights in matters such as marriage and adoption than under the previous administration.
With respect to the same sex marriages, one thing comes to my mind time and again. Law should ideally protect us only from against each other and not from ourselves. Let us leave to to religions or beliefs - as those things are suggestive in manner, not compulsory . So if 2 people are doing something with their own choice and it doesn’t have a direct impact on the third one, it shouldn’t be in the scope of law.
It’s been a busy week for GLBT couples and families - the Vermont legislature overrode the governor’s veto, making Vermont the 4th state in the union; Washington, DC’s council voted to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere and, finally, this note about the White House Easter Egg roll:
WASHINGTON (AP) _ The White House is allocating tickets for the upcoming Easter Egg Roll to gay and lesbian families as part of the Obama administration’s outreach to diverse communities.
Families say the gesture shows that the new Democratic administration values them as equal to other families. And for many, being included in the annual tradition _ dating to 1878 _ renews hope that they will have more support in their quest for equal rights in matters such as marriage and adoption than under the previous administration.
With respect to the same sex marriages, one thing comes to my mind time and again. Law should ideally protect us only from against each other and not from ourselves. Let us leave to to religions or beliefs - as those things are suggestive in manner, not compulsory . So if 2 people are doing something with their own choice and it doesn’t have a direct impact on the third one, it shouldn’t be in the scope of law.
Great point Crystal. It just seems that some people are incapable of understanding this concept.