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: J.B.C. who wrote (111999)	5/27/2009 5:40:42 AM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541580

>>This argument and that equality doesn't exists is a strawman argument. What Suma is advocating is changing the definition of marriage. True equal treatment requires that any consenting adult should be able to marry any other consenting adult, as long as they are both otherwise unencumbered and meet whatever the other basic requirements are. That's an opinion, one I don't share.<< J.B.C. - Whether or not equal treatment currently exists is not really a matter of opinion. It's a matter of logic. As a heterosexual man, I can marry anyone I fall in love with and want to marry, since that person will always be a woman. I'm presuming the same is true of you. A gay man doesn't have that same right in most states, currently, since the person he falls in love with will be another man. That's unequal treatment under the law. Yes, we're talking about changing the definition of marriage, to some extent. That has nothing to do with whether it's the right thing to do or not. Can you come up with any logical reason why homosexuals should not be legally entitled to marry each other? You haven't yet. But then, neither has anyone else that I have ever heard argue the point. - Allen