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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (490926)	6/26/2009 7:00:02 PM
From: tejek	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575637

Ted, > Why? The popular vote isn't necessarily a fair or just or legal one. Look how long it took women to get the right to vote. It eventually happened, didn't it? And it didn't take a judge demanding that alternative definitions of a "man" be given "equal protection." That's my whole beef, that "equal protection" is being twisted in a way that would justify ANYONE'S definition of a marriage. For example, the following would also fall under "equal protection," at least the way it is being applied: - Brother marries sister. - Man marries dog. - Man marries 12-year-old girl. - Man marries wife plus four concubines. - Man marries Ford Mustang. Look.....if you are equating the union of two gays with the possibilities up above, then you are homophobic. [EOS]