Senator could decide gay marriage in NYWith one more vote needed to pass gay marriage, New York Sen. Greg Ball holds out for stronger religious protections. CLICK HERE to read our recent OFF-SET interview with Evan Wolfson, president of Freedom to Marry, who says ending exclusion from marriage helps families "while hurting no one." And CLICK HERE for our recent interview with Iraq War veteran and gay rights advocate Lt. Dan Choi on his arrest in Moscow while protesting the ban on a gay rights parade. |
  @inthearena on Twitter Last night was our final show. Thanks so much for your support. What will you miss most about the show? #cnn inthearena.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/04/mar…
Columnist Laura Washington and @nprscottsimon revealed their 50th birthday wishes for President @BarackObama. #cnn inthearena.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/05/50t…
#Debt commission co-chair Alan Simpson slams the "disappointing" debt deal, saying Washington is "dysfunctional." #cnn inthearena.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/04/deb…
Ben Stein says we may very well be headed towards a double-dip recession, but "things are not that terrible." #cnn inthearena.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/04/ste…
Our last show is 2nite, please join us at 8pm ET. One of our favorites was @FareedZakaria, who was on last night! #cnn inthearena.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/03/zak…
 |
© 2011 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Contact us | Work for us | Help
Did Christina Romans really ask Sen. Greg Ball if he was going to "pitch, not catch" doing the interview this afternoon? I have come to expect this type of thing from Fox, but the gay innuendo served no purpose other than to ellicit a response from Sen. Ball. Kudos to him for not falling for it. Christina, shame on you.
If Lt. Choix was discharged from the service, why is he wearing his uniform?
Hummm, he's kind of cute.
Greg Ball should know that the civil rights of minority groups shouldn't be a popularity contest. After all, if the the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had been put to a popular vote in the Deep South, I think we all know how THAT would've turned out.
Ball claims that the sticking point is the "religious protections" in the bill. Exactly what kinds of religious liberties does Ball think are at risk here? Muslim couples are allowed to marry. Atheist couples are allowed to marry. But syngogues have never been FORCED to provide wedding services to Muslim couples, and Catholic churches have never been FORCED to provide ceremonies for Atheist couples. Why is anything going to change once Gay couples are allowed to marry?
Anyway, none of the legal benefits of marriage come from the church, they come from GOVERNMENT. This is a non-issue that is being raised by politicians who apparently will not vote with the courage of their convictions.
Chuck, people do not have a right to coerce other people to approve of their behavior. What each person has a right to is life, liberty (traditionally defined as not being unjustly incarcerated), and property. For the state to force people at large to approve of a union that they morally or religiously object to violates the rights of those who object to deviant relationships. S*xual & familial relationships frame all other relationships affecting the entire social fabric. So, the community has every right to place their stamp of approval on some s*xual unions and not others.