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: tejek who wrote (553193)	3/4/2010 7:55:44 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1573849

Up to the beginning of the 20th century, marriage was not the norm. Depends on how you define marriage. Marriage as a cultural institution, has existed for far longer than heavy state involvement in, documented recognition of, and support for, marriage. That distinction is one reason that I say the debate really isn't about gay/same-sex marriage at all. If you define marriage in the traditional way, than same sex relationships aren't marriages. If you define it in a less traditional way, than you can define it to include them; but nothing is stopping same sex couples from living together, having romantic and sexual relationships with each other, having a ceremony about their commitment, considering and calling each other spouses/married, etc. Same sex couples can do all of that. What they can't do at the moment (at least in general) is get government recognition of and support for the relationship as a marriage or even as a "civil-union". I'm not heavily involved in this issue even in the sense of having a strong position that I argue about it too often. I used to be clearly against it, but now not so much (which doesn't mean I'm a supporter either). I just try to counter sloppiness in the framing of the debate, and the idea that state recognition and benefits are a constitutional right that should be imposed by courts. If the country shifts enough and people get behind the idea, and really start to accept it, and than the change gets voted in to law, I won't lift a hand to fight against it, but I think the courts really don't have any business trying to remake society.