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: Katelew who wrote (112070)	5/28/2009 7:19:57 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 541627

I was actually responding to Allen's comment about there being no logical basis for denying equal marital status to gay couples and pointed out the precedent established in MA regarding adoptions that followed the legalization of gay marriage. And the fear that existed then in the clergy that other litigation would follow. Unwarranted fear is simply not a "logical basis." By definition. Like Allen, I have never heard a logical basis. Mostly the argument is about "destroying marriage," whatever that may entail. I have never heard an argument that successfully made the case that it would destroy marriage. Traditional marriage has long since taken a beating from heterosexuals. I don't see how homosexuals could have anything new and unique to bring to the table in terms of human character and relationship foibles. I have never been an active advocate of gay marriage but only because I consider the strategy of pushing it before its time risky for the cause and would prefer not to elevate the already too high general political hostility level. My lack of active support is strategic. I fully support and put a high priority on the principle of equal protection in all matters including this one. I don't see how anyone of good faith and with half a brain could fail to see the equal protection case. I can understand that some may be inclined to put a lower priority on equal protection under law than on some of their other beliefs and values, but I don't see how anyone could fail to grasp the legitimacy of the equal protection aspect.