Sam wrote: > I'll try again. The way our society understands marriage is between a > man and a women. That's the way nature intended. If a couple can't > have a child and adopt of use a test tube they're still doing what > nature intended, they just have a handicap or a good heart. > What I'm hearing now is people wanting it to be accepted that nature > intended gay marriage just as readily as heterosexual. I'm just saying > it's acceptable but not what nature intended. You know the whole > evolution thing.
Okay. I guess I just see being gay as a similar handicap as being barren, for these purposes. >>You make the assumption that I want to change morals. My morals tell me >>that treating someone as though they were a lesser person just because >>they're gay is wrong. > > Not giving them the label marriage is not treating them lesser, it's > just noticing a difference. Think Miss, Mrs., Ms and Mr. Why are we > not equal? In my opinion, requiring separate labels *is* treating them differently and, for that matter, as lesser. How many little girls do you know who grew up dreaming of the day they'd be in a civil union? As for gender labels like Miss, Ms., and Mr., I should point out that Ms. was largely created due to a rejection of the differentiation between Mrs. and Miss. That is, a large number of women wanted to eliminate the separate labels. Kinda ended up broken in the end, but that was the intent. --Ben ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:180704 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
