>>Interesting that we both did that. You defended your position (on this and other issues) much better than I did, however. My comments were interpreted in a way I did not expect.
Like you, I'm not a supporter of gay marriage. I simply don't have an interest in opposing it any more.<<
MM -
You and Tim have changed your position on this issue to a point, and I commend you both for being that open-minded.
To me, opposition to gay marriage really can't be defended on any rational basis. It's a simple matter of non-discrimination against people who are the way the are, and have no choice in the matter. Opposing gay marriage is the equivalent of saying asians shouldn't be allowed to marry, or something like that.
I will say this to you, in an effort to move you further along. If you believe that the government should not interfere in people's personal lives, and you believe that people shouldn't be discriminated against because of facts about themselves over which they have no control, then I don't see how you can support the stance that gays should be allowed to "marry," but that the marriage should not confer the same legal privileges on them that it does to heterosexuals.
I realize, MM, that you have not stated that position. Or at least, I don't think so. I know Tim has, though. Maybe I should have posted this to him, as I know he doesn't always read posts that aren't directed to him.
Do you agree with my reasoning?
Of course I don't expect you to become a campaigner for gay marriage. I'm just trying to see if your thinking, or Tim's, might yet change incrementally.
- Allen |
