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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (306203)	5/21/2009 12:45:34 PM
From: Brumar89	3 Recommendations Respond to of 793717

Right about symbolism. In the case of gays, I understand their desire to have every element of society and the state define them as part of 'normal'. I understand that too. But I can't sympathize with using state power to bully people in revenge for not "accepting" them.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (306203)	5/21/2009 2:35:18 PM
From: Neeka	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793717

I don't know anything about Gay traditions (if there are any?) and I don't really want to for that matter, but imo the problem is that we haven't successfully defined "normal" because it can't be discussed. I understand that for Gays a state sanctioned marriage certificate would end the argument about whether they are or are not a whole and integral part of our society and culture, but I think most of us can agree it has nothing to do with being normal or abnormal and everything to do with tradition. Gays can not or will not have that discussion. I understand their desire to have every element of society and the state define them as part of 'normal'.