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: TimF who wrote (71482)	8/4/2003 3:56:14 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Yeah, no one is looking at the utter unfairness to those who are excluded from marriages of convenience. I mean, like, I'm not getting any younger and pretty soon there won't be any men my age to marry for convenience. All well and good to say that I could marry a man for convenience, but I effectively can't if they've all died off. Now, that's unfair! And besides that, all those heterosexual marriages of convenience that are such a pillar of our great institution of marriage, white picket fence and all, are getting all the bennies. Well, they deserve them just because they can pass. Of course that's OK because the discrimination is passive. I don't have to add the <g>, do I?