View Single Post
  #60  
Old March 24th, 2013, 01:45 AM
BionicToad BionicToad is offline
Senior Member
Cruise Maniac
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Kandahar, Afghanistan
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aidan View Post
That is an interesting perspective, but flawed.

Do you consider the rights of black people in the United States to marry and to be treated equally by the government "sponsorship at the expense of everyone else"?

If your answer is "no" (and I hope it's no), would you support the exact same governmental treatment for gays and lesbians?

As far as the Scouts, the issue is much ado about nothing. As a private organization, they can be as bigoted as they like -- as long as they don't get any of our tax money or use our public buildings while doing their rituals.
Only flawed because you don't understand my point. Marriage has historically been a religious event between a man and a woman. I have no objection at all to civil unions for gays and lesbians, but their demand that marriage be legally changed to include amounts to redefining what vastly more people have been doing to the benefit of a vocal minority. We should not be forced to rename yellow to blue, to accomodate those who insist on having juandice. Likewise when a minority seeks to take something away from a majority to their personal benefit, I object to it.

Should marriage be a "least common denominator" thing? How long will it be before polygamy, marrying farm animals, or whatever forces a similar redefinition? There is even a case in China of a woman who chose to marry herself. What are the tax implications of defining Rover or Fluffy as your spouse? Does that qualify as a family member deduction?

It does not have to be religious to you or to me, but it is to many people, and it's discrimination to take what belongs to them. And as I have pointed out above, it basically comes down to, "If I can't have what I am demanding, I'll see the destruction of what I can't have", and I don't think it's right to consider that. It's not people who support marriage who refuse to let others have their own thing, however they describe it. It them, who have to denigrate something that isn't theirs, in the name of equality.
Reply With Quote