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 (72177)	8/10/2003 9:51:55 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

And goodness gracious most sex with minors is men with girls, and the girls often end up pregnant and unsupported. If we're going to worry about sex with minors, can we start with men predating on underage girls? That is so much more common than anything else, and it wreaks a lot of havoc. Secondly lets go after second husbands and boyfriends of mothers who abuse the children of the women they are dating. Again, since so few people are actually homosexual, the unaffiliated male in a household is a much bigger problem. I'm interested in focusing resources on major problems, and these are two huge ones, that most people don't want to touch. Strange.

To: Lane3 who wrote (72177)	8/10/2003 11:31:48 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

Are you going to deal with my question of how Washington would be affected by civil unions effected in other states? Ihe simple answer is, I don't know, and won't know until we geet some court cases under our belts. I can see issues being raised in numerous areas, but how they would play out in the courts I don't know. As I undestand it, in VT, the members of a civil union have the same rights as married people. So if they came to Washington and claimed under FF&C the same rights as married people, would they prevail? I have no idea. So I can't answer your question. Nobody can.