Comments on: Vermont’s House Vote

By: Stefano A

Stefano A — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 20:25:49 +0000

Stefano, I think the comment was intended to be satire.

Ah! Then, in that case, I retract my comment.

By: gordo

gordo — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 19:36:14 +0000

“Today’s adaptations of “Romeo and Juliet” miss the point that it is a cautionary tale: these two promising youths followed their selfish passions against the earnest advice of their parents and their duty to their families, and paid the price for it.”

It’s either satire, or someone completely missed the point of Romeo and Juliet!

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 18:35:34 +0000

Stefano, I think the comment was intended to be satire.

By: Stefano A

Stefano A — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 18:21:51 +0000

But don’t call me racist, I have plenty of friends among the lesser breeds. . . . while I am stuck with this old hag of a wife . . . .

Such drivel . . . but alright, we’ll not call you a “racist”, instead I think it would be apt to say your simply a misogynistic bigot.

By: Stephan Oursfroid

Stephan Oursfroid — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 13:49:24 +0000

This legislation is worrying. Even if it touches only civil marriages, churches and other private associations will be strongly pressured to conform to this passing mood. One has only to look at when the Supreme Court ignored long-standing tradition and the concerns of conservative citizens and redefined marriage to be between spouses of any race. There is now hardly any mainstream denomination that will not recognize these unnatural unions. But don’t call me racist, I have plenty of friends among the lesser breeds.
This is all part of a peculiarly modern trend of thinking that any loving couple should be allowed to marry. Today’s adaptations of “Romeo and Juliet” miss the point that it is a cautionary tale: these two promising youths followed their selfish passions against the earnest advice of their parents and their duty to their families, and paid the price for it. Indeed young people today think they can couple with however they want. That is certainly not going to happen while I am stuck with this old hag of a wife, whom I love very dearly.
But this trend is inevitable as long as religion keeps such a hold on our nation. If you believe your feeling are decided by a benevolent being, obviously that legitimizes them; atheist know that they are only accidents of evolution, and should be resisted if they are inopportune. If you ask Christians the reason as to their faith, most will talk of warm, comforting feelings rather than cold, hard facts and logic; and it is the same with gay love. And churches have to pander to their pews. Yet more evidence as to the need for a more secular, atheistic outlook in this country.

By: cd

cd — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 05:50:29 +0000

The Speaker of the House, who abstained (it’s some kind of institutional custom on the passage vote) has said he will also cast a vote to override a veto. That makes for 98.

By: Zeke

Zeke — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 01:53:54 +0000

Well it’s really comforting to know that these people will vote to support their political party in a veto override but wouldn’t vote “yes” on the original vote just because it’s the right thing to do to end discrimination and support equality for all Vermonters.

By: Matt Algren

Matt Algren — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 22:14:03 +0000

Reps Debbie Evans and Sonny Audette (both Democrats) pledged to switch if the bill is vetoed. The quotes come from an article published yesterday morning in the Burlington Free Press.

If there is a vote to override a gubernatorial veto, however, [Rep. Debbie] Evans said she will vote for it. The Democratic caucus is firm about sticking together to challenge the governor, she said.

Evans said she believes Gov. Jim Douglas interfered with the legislative process by declaring last week that he would veto the bill before it went through the Legislature. “No one was happy with that,” she said.

She wasn’t the only Democrat who said she would switch her vote to override a veto. Albert “Sonny” Audette, D-South Burlington, said he would do the same.

http://blog.mattalgren.com/2009/04/vermont-legislature-votes-for-marriage/

And I’m pretty sure (but not positive) that it’s 2/3 of those present.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:55:24 +0000

Mike,

Can you give us a link to that?

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 21:47:37 +0000

Several of the no votes have already stated that they’d flip their vote if it comes down to a veto battle.