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: one_less who wrote (38040)	2/22/2005 5:28:32 PM
From: Orcastraiter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

Frankly, I think it is time for the state to get out of the marriage business all together. Make ‘civil union’ a requirement for any couple to be recognized by law and leave the term ‘marriage’ to what ever communities choose to define it according to their views on it. I doubt ‘gay marriage’ would even be a ‘cause’ under those circumstances. I think we are in agreement here. If there's any disagreement it's a matter of semantics. I see no need to muddy up the waters by trying to differentiate between the term marriage and union. To me they are one and the same. You seem to want to reserve the word marriage for a church sanctified wedding. I think that's sharpening up the pencil a bit too much. Marriage, union, wedlock, life partners...you pick the terminology, so long as the outcome is equal treatment under the law. Orca