------------------------------------------------------------------------ * G * O * A * N * E * T *** C * L * A * S * S * I * F * I * E * D * S * ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sangath, www.sangath.com, is looking to build a centre for services, training and research and seeks to buy approx 1500 to 2000 sq mtrs land betweeen Mapusa and Bambolim and surrounding rural areas. Please contact: [email protected] or [email protected] or ph+91-9881499458 http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2009-July/180028.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:59:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Santosh Helekar <[email protected]> This political interference by a religious organization with the public policy and constitution of secular country should be rejected by all secular-minded people. The spread of bigoted false information on homosexuals by the news service and priests of one particular religion because of their provincial faith-based beliefs, as is being done below, deserves nothing but the strongest condemnation. Mario responds: Santosh, Whatever a religious organization says falls without limits under constitutionally protected free speech as does your opposition and condemnation of their positions. The only exception is deliberate incitement to violence and panic, which is not protected. My personal opposition to "gay marriage" has nothing to do with homosexuality or religion and everything to do with the fact that words mean things and the tradidional definition of a "marriage" throughout history has always been between one man and one woman. If this definition is thrown open on the basis of civil rights or "fairness" then one has to also consider other permutations and combinations of individuals or groups of individuals who will surely make similar claims. The mind boggles at the creative unions that may be possible. We have already seen a lawsuit in the US by a polygamist claiming he is being discriminated against in a state that has approved the word marriage for gay unions. The legal benefits of a committed domestic partnership does not depend on what the union is called, and the rational option in my never-humble opinion would be for states to give gay's who are willing to commit in writing to a relationship with a particular person all the legal rights that a married couple currently enjoy.
