On Feb 23, 2004, at 1:00 AM, mike skoglund wrote:

<snip>

The SCOTUS decision that emphasized the unconstitutionality of those
statutes is apposite to this discussion. Just because a law is on the books
doesn't mean it's constitutional.


Mayor Newsom's strategy is risky and confrontational, but there's no reason
a Minneapolis city attorney couldn't go into court on Monday morning and
file a claim for a declaratory judgment. My guess is the issue will be
settled in the SCOTUS before too long.

This shouldn't proceed through the courts at all. If these renegade jurists had any sense of constitutional duty, they'd sent the complainants packing - back to the legislatures - where this debate belongs.


In any case, it's only a matter of time. The polls are divided, but the
young people support same-sex marriage.

Which young people? Home schooled? From religious schools? The sons and daughters of Islamic and Catholic immigrants?


It may take a year or five or
twenty, but progress is inevitable.

Towards what, exactly?



Mike Skoglund // New York NY // Minneapolis MN // Sodom // Gomorrah



Reap the whirlwind, Mike.


Neal Krasnoff
Loring Park

REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.


For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to