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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (537902)	2/10/2004 10:12:09 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Not bad, but it is not an equal protection issue to provide something called "marriage" to all comers. The state has the right to invoke conditions, for example, by banning close cousins from marrying, or banning bigamy. To say that we will not penalize something is not to say that we will fully embrace it on the same basis as a central practice of our civilization. And if there were residual equal protection issues, "civil union" would suffice to take care of them, without enjoying the term "marriage" as an official designation. We worry about the ecology of forests, but not about the ecology of society. The complete acceptance of homosexuality is a rather large social experiment. Even if one wants to go there eventually, it makes sense not to force it down everyone's throat, but to take it in stages......