SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (542607)2/19/2004 11:49:25 AM
From: Johannes Pilch  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
There is no right to "equal protection" of homosexual marriages in the Constitution. But there is a Constitutional right allowing the majority to define itself and codify its institutions by use of the vote and by Amendment. Leftists constantly deny the majority these rights because leftists know they will lose.

The majority needs only vote to codify what we already know and have always known without any doubt at all-- that marriage can exist only between a man and a woman. A homosexual's right to equal protection would remain intact on the basis of his status as an individual - not on the basis of his status of having penis-to-rectum sex.

(duh...)



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (542607)2/19/2004 12:06:47 PM
From: Thomas A Watson  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
So then can you make a case why a man dog relationship is any different than a man man relationship for equal idiots protection under the Kenneth E. Phillipps constitutional right to stupidity.