3Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteWhy emasculate defense against marriage act?
This is a discussion on A new way to get HR 822 enacted within the Firearm Politics & 2nd Amendment Issues forums, part of the Main Category category; What if HR 822 was joined with a similar bill requiring all states to recognize all other states' marriage licenses, ...
A new way to get HR 822 enacted What if HR 822 was joined with a similar bill requiring all states to recognize all other states' marriage licenses, effectively emasculating the Defense of Marriage Act. Would 60 senators vote for or against such a bill?
Why emasculate defense against marriage act?
You'd get dedicated liberals hand-wringing, wanting the marriage part, but voting against for the concealed carry part; and you'd get dedicated conservatives voting against for BOTH parts (the "states rights trump all" conservatives.) So, no, it wouldn't pass.
Because the government shouldn't be involved in marriage AT ALL. So why have it artificially block individuals who can legally marry in their states from having the same rights as everyone else? My preference would be for the government to stop using the word "marriage" at all. You could form two-person "domestic partnerships" between any two consenting responsible adults that are a statement of two people entering into a mutually beneficial financial responsibility arrangement. If they want to call it "marriage", so be it. If they want a "wedding", or a "marriage certificate", go get one from your local church.Originally Posted by gunsrgr8
But as long as the government insists on being involved in "marriage", it should be open to any two consenting responsible adults. The idea that the purpose of government-sanctioned marriage is for procreation and family stability is a joke. If that is going to be your justification, then you also have to ban sterile people from getting married, and make divorce *SIGNIFICANTLY* harder. The fact that somewhere in the world gays can marry had no impact on the farce of a marriage Kardashian had - or any of Gingrich's prior failed marriages.
Well, then let me ask a different question. In NYS I can carry in any bar, restaurant, or other place serving alcohol. I can sit an any bar and sip a burbon on the rocks while carrying.
If HR 822 becomes law, would I be able to do the same in Tenn and Ohio? If not, why should those states be allowed to restrict the rights I enjoy under my home state?
Gun laws, combined with the irrational way individual States are implementing them, is just too chaotic and it needs to be fixed. Marriage laws are pretty clear cut.
I personally believe the government has no right to be involved in either one.
I also think it is untrue that gun rights is a liberal vs Conservative issue. All my Liberal friends believe in the right to carry and gun rights in general. If you want to put a label on it, it is more of a rural vs. urban divide.
Merlin:
You are correct. But you will find more support for anti gun laws by liberals than you will from conservatives, so many of us confuse the the terms. There are many anitgun conservatives too. Best terminology would be "anti gun" and "pro gun." I think all of us realize this but get wrapped up in the overall political conflict.
If I understand 822 correctly, the passage would not ensure that your states laws are observed in other state but it would ensure that other states would honor your states issuance of your CCW.
So you would need to abide by the laws of the state you are in not from.
To not stand against injustice is to stand for it.
Don't confuse my personality and my attitude.
My personality is who I am, my attitude depends on who you are.
My understanding matches walt's. It means that every state/county/city's laws remain the same as they are now, with all the same restrictions - with one change. If a state recognizes the existence of a concealed handgun license, they must treat *ALL* concealed handgun licenses the same. So because NYC recognizes their own handgun license, they would have to recognize California's, and Tennessee's, and Texas', and Oregon's, etc, etc, etc. But states that have laws that say "you can't carry in a bar, even with a license," still have that enforced, even if the CHL state-of-issue doesn't have such a law.
It's not a "concealed carry is a RIGHT across all states" law, but it is a step in the right direction.
You actually have a carry permit that NYC recognizes? I guess they feel they don't need to restrict drinking and packing since they don't hand put many permits themselves and are none to friendly to others.
HR822 does NOT intend to set standards for CCW or to change State laws on how to carry. It's only about recognizing each others permits.
Posting Permissions