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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (108145)	4/10/2009 10:12:36 AM
From: d[-_-]b	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541465

The state doesn't preside over the institutions it recognizes the legal contract made between two people - same for civil unions. You are passionate on the issue - I'll give you that - not sure your approach convinces with all the name calling. It will require time for this country to go along with the concept, I suspect it'll happen rather soon - I was amazed prop 8 passed and disappointed, just when you think you know a people and they surprise like that.

To: epicure who wrote (108145)	4/10/2009 12:07:48 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541465

>>Of course it's a fight over words. Labels are important. Who wants to be called a "racist" or a "pedophile"- even if they aren't one. What you call things, and how you group people, matters. That's why it pisses people off to be labeled (even sometimes when you label them correctly.)<< MP - It's not just a fight over words. Those who say that civil unions already confer all the rights of marriage on gay couples, so gay marriage is unnecessary, seem to be ignoring the fact that such civil unions are available in only a handful of states. (CA, DC, HI, ME, MD, NH, NJ, OR, WA) In some of those states, civil unions confer most of the same legal rights as marriage does, but not all of them. California is one example. Here, there's a thing called a Domestic Partnership. It's available to homosexual couples and some people over 62 years of age, and was established in 1999. At that time, there were few legal rights associated with it. Those rights have been expanded over the years, but they still don't include things like spousal benefits under the CalPERS long-term care insurance plan. It's worth noting that every expansion of benefits under the Domestic Partnership law has been fought in court by groups opposed to gay rights. - Allen