> I should have answered the email after I returned from a 4 hours meeting and
> then had lunch. Don't feel too much like fighting now. :)
I understand the feeling. It's hard to have fire in your belly when
your belly's empty to begin with. :-)
> But how did I threaten you?
>> No, but if you use your "right to live" to try to change something
>> that is
>> important to me (Institution of marriage between a man/women as God
>> intended), I will challenge it.
Did I misinterpret this? I read it as "argue with me, and I'll argue
with your right to live".
> Bottom line is this: Not everyone is going to agree with it. We (The
> American people) have got to come up with a way to resolve this issue.
>
> Gays can't push their beliefs on thos who oppose and visa-versa.
Well, they *can* but they *shouldn't*. :-) Huuuuuuuuge difference
between the two. But I get your meaning.
> Is there a common ground? Who knows. Bush just so happens to be a
> Christian. Is we had an atheist president, then he would just make gay
> marriage legal across the board and that would be forcing it down my throat.
>
> It's just a situation that doesn't have an easy answer.
There's a statement that I can certainly agree with!
--BenD
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
