> -----Original Message----- > From: Yves Arsenault [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 1:50 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Gay Marriage( Was: Re: Activist Judges) > > I believe I did. > > Because they are very different biologically. If we are strickly > saying marriage is just a choice people make to be together, then > there is no difference. But there is the sexual biological issue in > marriage if sex is a big part of marriage.
Again - sex is a non-existent issue when considering state marriage requirements and benefits. The state doesn't care if your marriage results in sex or children, period. If you're married and not having sex at all you get the same benefits as those married and having sex. Since there is no change in the requirements or the benefits why should there be a change in the label? And why only for this and not for the millions of other things that also do not affect requirements or benefits? Jim Davis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:148211 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
