The Constitutionality of Gay Marriage II

And here's the NYT piece.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 25, 2004
Putting Bias in the Constitution

ith his re-election campaign barely started and his conservative base already demanding tribute, President Bush proposes to radically rewrite the Constitution. The amendment he announced support for yesterday could not only keep gay couples from marrying, as he maintains, but could also threaten the basic legal protections gay Americans have won in recent years. It would inject meanspiritedness and exclusion into the document embodying our highest principles and aspirations.

If Mr. Bush had been acting as a president yesterday, rather than a presidential candidate, he would have tried to guide the nation on the divisive question of what rights gay Americans have. Across the nation, elected officials and others have been weighing in on whether they believe gays should be allowed to marry, have civil unions, adopt, visit their partners in hospitals and be free from employment discrimination. Except for a throwaway line about proceeding with "kindness and good will and decency," the president's speech was a call for taking rights away from gay Americans.

President Bush's studied unwillingness to talk about the rights gay people do have is particularly significant given the wording of the Federal Marriage Amendment now pending in Congress. It calls for denying same-sex couples not only marriage, but also its "legal incidents." It could well be used to deny gay couples even economic benefits, which are now widely recognized by cities, states and corporations. Such an amendment could radically roll back the rights of millions of Americans.

In his remarks yesterday, President Bush tried to create a sense of crisis. He talked of the highest Massachusetts court's recognition of gay marriage, San Francisco officials' decision to grant marriage licenses to gay couples and a New Mexico county's doing the same thing. He did not say the New Mexico attorney general found that gay marriages violate state law, the California attorney general is asking the California Supreme Court to review San Francisco's actions, and Massachusetts is considering amending its State Constitution to prohibit gay marriage. The president, who believes so strongly in states' rights in other contexts, should let the states do their jobs and work out their marriage laws before resorting to a constitutional amendment.

The Constitution has been amended over the years to bring women, blacks and young people into fuller citizenship. President Bush's amendment would be the first adopted to stigmatize and exclude a group of Americans. Polls show that while a majority of Americans oppose gay marriage, many would prefer to allow the states to resolve the issue rather than adopting a constitutional amendment. They understand what President Bush does not: the Constitution is too important to be folded, spindled or mutilated for political gain.



Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top

The Constitutionality of Gay Marriage I

This is a very powerful piece. I highly doubt it if Bush
will succeed in pursuing this constitutional amendment.
But if we take one step back, and view this problem in
a different light, we may realize that this again is an
example of democracy running into a wall.

I say so because it's apparent to me that the only reason
Bush said what he said is that he's counting on half of
America to like it. He doesn't mind steping on the minority
and crush them as long as he can win the favor of his voters.
The only thing left for him to pray for is that his voters
will translate to a victory in the electoral college.

I like the fact that there's always the Supreme Court which
can make unpopular decisions and keep this country in check.
But then, they are bound by the constitution and indirectly
what the majority believes. Let's just hope the majority hasn't
lost its sense. But seriously, can we trust the majority with
the right and wrong? Did the majority used to think slavery was good?
Who is to uphold the right when the truth sometimes finds only
a small crowd of adherents?

This is what I worry about. Bush's only a minor vice, knowing
damn well how this game works.

Do grades help or hinder?

Do grades help or hinder?

By: Raphael Minder

Now jobs are scarce, business school students find themselves with anew balancing act to master: how to improve their recruitment prospects while making sure the tougher competition does not lead to a less pleasant learning environment.

One question that has come to the forefront is whether grades should matter. On Monday Columbia Business School gets the results of its referendum on a proposal to forbid students from disclosing their grades to recruiters. Many schools, including Harvard have effected the nondisclosure policy since Wharton initiated this trend in 1992. Most recently, the student body at Chicago ratified a similar policy.

While most companies say they do not rely on grades to assess MBA candidates, some employers do value grades as an indicator of future performance.

"With most recruiters grade disclosure is a non-issue but some of our top recruiters, primarily the top-tier investment banks and consulting firms, remain very interested in having grades as a metric to judge candidates," says Regina Resnick, assistant dean and director of Columbia's MBA career services. "In this job market, they want to feel confident that they are hiring people who have the demonstrated skill set and can hit the ground running."

Ms Resnick says one recruiter has warned that it may switch to other schools if Columbia stops disclosing grades. Such a threat strikes a particular chord at Columbia because the New York school has established strong ties with the financial services community, building on its proximity to Wall Street.

Banks are reluctant to discuss their hiring policy. One banker says it would be hard to draw an overall conclusion about the importance of grades since "what we are looking for when it comes to investment banking is, for example, not identical to what applies in sales".

The proposal for non-disclosure - the first such referendum at Columbia Business School - faces an uphill struggle because it requires the backing of 70 per cent of students to come into force. Columbia's administration has stayed on the sidelines of the disclosure debate - since the issue is in the hands of the students - but has indicated that it would prefer to maintain the status quo, not least because of concerns about how a non-disclosure policy could be monitored and enforced.

At Wharton, which has had non-disclosure since 1992, "the faculty does not like this [policy] at all because it feels that it degrades the value of the Wharton education", says Laura Bennett, head of Wharton's career advisory body. "To some [professors], it is almost disrespectful to have to teach people who do not care about their grades."

Grade disclosure can be seen as part of a broader debate among students about how far competition should be fostered at business school; and among faculty about whether grades are a valuable component of a business school education.

"Rather than talking about disclosure, I think that we should stop giving grades because students at business school should be treated like adults and it is stupid to try to beat them into performing," says Bruce Greenwald, a professor at Columbia.

"There is no evidence that your grades at business school say much about your prospects in your future business career. The real grade students will get is their performance five years from now," he adds.

David Beim, a professor who was formerly head of investment banking at Bankers Trust, disagrees: "I think grades are hugely important because they provide useful feedback and they help students decide whether a subject is something they should pursue in their future career."

Having interviewed many MBA students during his banking days, Prof Beim says that he attached most importance to the candidates' references but found grades did provide "a useful screener".

Schools that have decided not to reveal grades claim that this policy has not hampered job-hunting. "I have not heard that anyone has lost an opportunity or a job due to the inability to disclose grades," says Robert Zielinski, who heads the student body at Chicago Graduate School of Business.

However, companies often send employees who are alumni back to their former campus to recruit. "Many alumni want to be able to ask grades as another measure of determining if candidates, most importantly career switchers, have demonstrated certain competencies," says Ms Resnick.

"It makes them more comfortable in fighting for the candidacy of someone who may not have had prior industry experience."

Ola Al Dajani, a Columbia student who interviewed with five investment banks, says that she was asked about her grades in accounting and corporate finance at the start of all her interviews and felt that "grades preconditioned the rest of the interview". She backs the policy of non-disclosure because she says grades should not be prominent in interviewing and also believes the focus on grades "affects the classroom experience".

Indeed, the most common argument among those who want to bar disclosure is that it would make for a less cut-throat atmosphere at a time when students are already stressed by the gloomy job outlook. Some also argue that, were it not for worries about grades, students would choose more challenging classes rather than those in which they are likely to score highest.

We went clubbin' last night at Crush in Adams Morgan. There are times when you just no longer want to think and only want your body to go its own way. Who said that your body doesn't have its own will? Stress, frustration and a sense of hopelessness have found their ways into my life and built up such a strong...what shall we say...despair, looking to shout out. The man-made world turns out to be outrageously against men in all possible ways. Lack of trust, messed up relationships and perverted incentives. We look around the world around us and must seek refuge in the remote tranquility of mind. Yes we nest in peace of mind, hoping to create another world that we can feel comfortable in. All this does not necessarily release my stress though and thus I must look for other ways to cry, to shout, to let out the suffer. Let your body go its way and dance like we'll not live another day. I want to fly in the lofty sky like a small small bird. No, no attention on me plz. I just want to enjoy the moment of being away from the filthy world and have the true peaceful world around me, seeing only the blue sky and white clouds and the rolling greens that extend even beyond the horizon. And fly fly fly. The ultimate freedom. The freedom to escape from gravity, to defy earthly being and to have my entire body flow in the air, drifting drifting drifting...
Yes I would like to think its my own will that leads me to the other side of the ocean, but it might as well be my body that has only simple reactions. As long as we cannot escape the limitations of our physical body, we cannot enjoy a single moment of true freedom. Let me become a bird, fly to death. Oh.. the only thing I will miss is love. Just sit tight and let my imagination soar. Laurie, you may not konw all this, but I long for you, long for your attention. Let the world be its own way and I only want a moment with you that lasts until for ever. Our souls will not part even if we both become birds. The quiet blue sky and the rolling green and the oddly shaped clouds. We will fly to the end of our life.