Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dayuhan who wrote (86835)	11/18/2004 8:39:55 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 793617

I would say it’s more about recognition and acceptance than about support Perhaps, but there is public support for marriages as well. and I see no valid reason for society to withhold either recognition or acceptance. My main point was just that it isn't really an issue of freedom. I view the distinction not as a way to downplay any claims by people pushing for recognition of unions of same sex couples, but rather as a way to avoid muddying and confusing important principles. If there is a strong reason for a change in the law then it should be argued for that reason, not by tossing out the term freedom to support anything you support whether or not it really is an issue of freedom. To the extent that it is an issue of public support it may be an equality/fairness issue. To the extent that it is about recognition I think that such recognition should be decided by the political process not the courts. If people vote to have gay "civil unions" recognized by the government I won't oppose it, and if the population really wants to use the term marriage that is then I won't scream about it. But I would oppose any attempt to push such a social change through by court action. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next