I don't agree. For thousands of years the definition of marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now you want to change that definition. Why not leave it alone and accept civil union? The right you're talking about is the right to change the definition of a commonly used word. What about my right to leave that word alone?
On 5/9/05, Gruss Gott wrote: > The difference is that you have a right your fellow citizen is being > denied simply because of their gender preference. Which sounds like a > perfect addition to: > > "May not be discriminated against due to race, religion, color, or creed." > > There's no need to have 2 marriages unless there's a need to 2 water > fountains which, of course, there isn't. If we're "protecting > marriage" why not only allow hispanics to marry? After all, they have > the lowest divorce rate. > > The government should have no say in who I choose to marry and that > should be anyone I care to as long as that person is an adult of sound > mind. > > Civil unions is like saying this: > > "You've complained because even though you and I do the exact same job > you get paid 50% less. I'll tell you what: how about if you only get > paid 40% less?" > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=17 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:156829 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=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
