Re: OT - This just in...
From: Eliyahu Rooff (lrooff_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/11/04
- Next message: Josh Rosenbluth: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- Previous message: Eliyahu Rooff: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- In reply to: Phyllis: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- Next in thread: Phyllis: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- Reply: Phyllis: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 07:06:03 -0700
"Phyllis" <phyllisnilsson@buckeye-express.com> wrote in message
news:4142F58D.8060801@buckeye-express.com...
> I know what you are saying, but what I am saying is absolutely
correct.
>
>
> 1. They want the privilege of marrying someone of the same sex just
> because they are gay, and that would be a privilege not allowed to
> heterosexuals.
>
You're making no sense whatsoever here. Marriages between members of
the same sex, if allowed, would be permitted to any couple who applied
for a marriage license. No one is going to ask "are you gay?" any more
than a clerk presently issuing a license will ask the applicants, "are
you heterosexual?". If you were single, and you and a girlfriend
decided you wanted to get married, you'd be allowed to as well. No one
would care if you were gay or straight, although most folks would
presume that you were gay simply because there's no logical reason that
the two of you would marry otherwise.
> 2. If one cannot discriminate against homosexuals on the basis of
their
> sexual preference, one should not be able to discriminate on the
grounds
> of heterosexuality.
>
Since no one would be discriminated against for being hetero, your
argument falls apart.
Eliyahu
- Next message: Josh Rosenbluth: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- Previous message: Eliyahu Rooff: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- In reply to: Phyllis: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- Next in thread: Phyllis: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- Reply: Phyllis: "Re: OT - This just in..."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|