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: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (542979)	2/19/2004 10:45:02 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

kerryboy can NOT think: "In two sentences, Kerry says two things that, in the view of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, are contradictory. The court was asked whether partitioning gay couples into an institution called 'civil unions' was discriminatory or not. The judges said it was -- because civil unions reinforce stigma and exclusion for no rational reason. If Kerry believes that civil unions do not do such a thing, he should explain why. Instead he just repeats the contradiction. "The basic question is: Why should the government grant a marriage license to two people who do not have biological children of their own, while denying such a license to two equally qualified people who also have no biological children of their own? Kerry's civil marriage to Teresa Heinz falls into the childless category. It also falls into a category condemned by the Catholic Church -- a second marriage after a divorce. Kerry needs to explain why what's good enough for him isn't good enough for a gay couple. He hasn't. He won't. He wants to pander to prejudice while maintaining he is in favor of equality. . . . "Kerry is pro-war, except when he's antiwar. He votes for war against Saddam but opposes financing it. He's for equality for gays, but against equality for gays in marriage. And his attempts to explain his having it every which way only confuse matters even further."

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (542979)	2/19/2004 11:09:55 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Gay marriage is a non-issue only important to Rednecks who voted for Bush under any circumstances. Feinstein chimed in likewise. You're not saying they voted for Bush are you? Maybe she's pandering to rednecks? "As if to signal the difficult politics of same-sex marriage, U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, running for re-election, said Thursday, "The mayor has decided to challenge state law. My opinion is that state law is fair and appropriate because it gives equal rights and responsibilities to all citizens." Spokesman David Sandretti added that the senator "supports current California law, establishing domestic partnerships with the full rights and responsibility of marriage, and she also agrees with the law's definition that marriage is between a man and a woman."