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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wayners who wrote (6874)	2/13/2004 12:06:56 PM
From: zonder	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20773

The purpose of marriage is to provide a legal binding contract in the raising of legitimate heirs (children)with both a mother and a father If you were right then couples who cannot conceive should get immediate divorces. But that does not necessarily happen. It is not impossible to see couples who have chosen never to have children, or others who have adopted. If its about obtain benefits or something, there are tons of domestic partner benefits available to boyfriend-girlfriends and homo partners Loads of heterosexual couples get married every day, and not necessarily for "benefits or something", so why do you assume gay people's marriages would have to be so? Gay Marriage is just silly Perhaps if you were gay and wanted to marry your partner, you would not think so. Personally, I cannot understand what men find so attractive about each other's hairy bodies. I mean, us women do, but only after having been programmed by evolution that way so that the human race won't die out -g- However, I recognize that I have no right to impose my choices on other people - a practice opponents of gay marriages might like to emulate - and if they do enjoy each other's bodies as well as companionship for life, that is their choice, not mine. After all, there are a number of references to "pursuit of happiness" being an "inalienable right" in state constitutions, and US Supreme Court did say that "the freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness." Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1010, 87 S. Ct. 1817 (1967). See also Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 54 L. Ed. 2d 618, 98 S. Ct. 673 (1978). [Quote & reference courtesy of Google] And if same-sex marriages do not infringe on anyone else's rights, the state apparently has no right to ban gay people from forming families of their own (i.e. pursuing happiness) - with or without children.

To: Wayners who wrote (6874)	2/13/2004 12:57:21 PM
From: tsigprofit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Marriage is there for many reasons, as a legal framework between two people. What about marriages where there are no children? BTW, that is the case with MANY marriages now. I would say that is your interpretation only of what marriage is for. >> purpose of marriage is to provide a legal binding contract in the raising of legitimate heirs