Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (71320)	8/3/2003 4:07:36 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Personally, I have never had any problem being friends with homosexuals, as long as they refrain from hitting on me. But it is also my view that regarding homosexuality as deviant is more than an unreasoning prejudice, but is an obvious judgment based on our biology. If there were no homosexuality, our species would be none the worse off; if there were no heterosexuality, we would not have a species. Additionally, it is apparent that the plumbing is made for heterosexual coupling, just as surely as that we are meant to walk on our legs or speak with our mouths. To treat it as an unreasoning impulse is wrong. Therefore, if society does not want to extend the same recognition to homosexual unions that it does to heterosexual unions, that is a legitimate choice. In doing so, it is defending its sense of propriety, even while being tolerant of deviance. Marriage is not a right. There is no question of rose- colored glasses. There is a question of where to draw lines, and it is society's prerogative to draw lines where it is comfortable. I think the fact that civil union is becoming an acceptable concept is an enormous concession.........