07-09-2010, 03:19 PM
KB
You stated as a valid reason for not allowing civil unions or gay marriage the fact that those couples cannot reproduce; by that logic all marriages that cannot reproduce are not valid, or else that is just an excuse for denying equal legal rights to a group of people because you personally do not approve of who they love and how they express that love. Either the inability to reproduce is a valid reason to deny marriage rights, or it isn't. To say it is a valid reason in the case of 2 men or 2 women, but not in the case of a man and a woman who cannot reproduce, is admitting that reproduction isn't really your core justification for denying these American citizens equal rights. Your spin on natural selection is a pretty poor line of defense for denying marriage rights to 10% of our society, unless you are going to apply the same logic to all marriages. You can't have it both ways.
I do not use my beliefs to deny you your natural right to the "pursuit of happiness" but you are using your beliefs to justify the denial of that same natural and constitutional right to a sizable portion of our state's population. I don't care who you love, how you love, or if you choose to register that relationship with the state, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult human. You, on the other hand, are trying to control those things things for others, and that is the core difference here. I can live with your views with the greatest indifference until you start using them to limit the natural rights of others, then I will do all legally, morally, and ethically possible to limit you in that pursuit.
Carol
You stated as a valid reason for not allowing civil unions or gay marriage the fact that those couples cannot reproduce; by that logic all marriages that cannot reproduce are not valid, or else that is just an excuse for denying equal legal rights to a group of people because you personally do not approve of who they love and how they express that love. Either the inability to reproduce is a valid reason to deny marriage rights, or it isn't. To say it is a valid reason in the case of 2 men or 2 women, but not in the case of a man and a woman who cannot reproduce, is admitting that reproduction isn't really your core justification for denying these American citizens equal rights. Your spin on natural selection is a pretty poor line of defense for denying marriage rights to 10% of our society, unless you are going to apply the same logic to all marriages. You can't have it both ways.
I do not use my beliefs to deny you your natural right to the "pursuit of happiness" but you are using your beliefs to justify the denial of that same natural and constitutional right to a sizable portion of our state's population. I don't care who you love, how you love, or if you choose to register that relationship with the state, as long as everyone involved is a consenting adult human. You, on the other hand, are trying to control those things things for others, and that is the core difference here. I can live with your views with the greatest indifference until you start using them to limit the natural rights of others, then I will do all legally, morally, and ethically possible to limit you in that pursuit.
Carol
Carol
Every time you feel yourself getting pulled into other people's nonsense, repeat these words: Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Polish Proverb
Every time you feel yourself getting pulled into other people's nonsense, repeat these words: Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Polish Proverb