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 : Polite Political Discussion- is it Possible? An Experiment. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Suma who wrote (505)	8/3/2006 2:31:03 PM
From: J. C. Dithers	Respond to of 1695

Suma, that's a daunting list of "rights." I think we are in danger of granting far too many "rights" to everyone. If instead we had one single law that said, "You must always try your best to do the right thing," it might save an awful lot of paperwork. In the meantime, many of the "rights" in the list can be accomplished by such means as wills, health proxies, contracts, written agreements, and the like. Where government "rights" are involved, "civil unions" have been invented are are offered in a number of states. Civil unions will no doubt be more readily available if gay marriages are banned. Generally speaking, I see no difference between "gay partners" and any other couples who choose to live together, such as roommates. In my memory, lots of different people (bachelors, spinsters, good friends, brothers and sisters, etc.) have chosen to live together on a permanent basis. I don't really see what one's sexual preference has to do with it. If we want to extend partner benefits or rights, then all these people should be entitled to the same thing.