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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fresc who wrote (37075)	2/9/2005 5:46:59 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 173976

I am sorry, I mis-stated what I was trying to say... "Why do you insist that it is dissembling a group? Think of it as a broadening of a group." I should have said dissembling to the group's identity of itself. If marriage is were a club, clearly when create additional sub-groups who can make legitimate claims to marriage you expand the group. The issue of gays cohabitating with legitimate government support, equivalent to heterosexual marriages is not being contested between us ... right? So the only remaining item is the use of the term 'marriage.' I have prolifically detailed some reasons why the current context of 'marriage' must be dissembled, not broadened, in order for the simpler context which you propose to replace it. You have so far ignored that aspect of the discussion which is curious to me since it is the single significant item. I speculated that it is some sort of reactive need to get something from the right wing but you have not clarified directly what your real motive is. Why marriage and not a civil union that offers essentially identical supports and protections? "You will loose, it has already started. Get over it! I wont lose anything no matter what happens on this issue but if it feels better for you to keep imbedding those quips, feel free.