Posted by Paul U at someuser.relianceinsurance.com on February 19, 2004 at 13:50:43:
In Reply to: Re: No I am saying posted by miss d on February 19, 2004 at 13:29:38:
: : The tax breaks and social benefits could be written into a Civil Union law.
: You still, though, haven not said which rights you would grant and which rights you would withhold.
Correct, I am avoiding that question. And will continue to as not to start another debate.
: : Yes I am discriminatory and biased on this subject due to belief and will admit it and understand it perfectly.
: Basically, then, you're saying you misspoke at the very beginning when you said:
: "Before I start... I am not nor have I ever had a problem with gay relationships/ people / values of gays."
: Because if not, you just totally contradicted yourself.
No I have not contradicted myself.. I have no issues against gays at all. I have issues against the state having to recognize a marriage between same-sex couples. These are 2 separate issues.
: : Nothing... never said they were... religion is sacred to the individual
: Exactly, which the ever-loving point.
: Because it is sacred to the *individual*, it should not play a part in public policy decision making.
Again... just because the religion is sacred to the individual doesn't mean the government has to recognize it.
: But I think Ralphy made the best point of all:
: How can you favor two 21 year olds (one male and one female) getting married because it looks like a kooky wild thing to do and they can undo it in 24 hours, over two people, no matter their sex, who love one another and want to commit the rest of their lives to one another?!
: That just makes absolutely no sense.
: To me, *that* is making a mockery of marriage.
And again I agree with that... As well as the whole theory of how weddings are handled in Nevada/ Las Vegas altogether. But that unfortunately is the fault of the state not marriage.