Quote:
Originally posted by Azred:
This is the bottom line: in some states the ballots asked "do you want to disallow marriage between two people of the same gender?" and a majority of the people said "yes, we want marriage to be a legal union of one male and one female". These referenda were legally placed on the ballots, a proper election was held, and the referenda were defeated.
Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and is not--must not--be defined as a "civil right". If it is, then every lifestyle choice would then, by extension, be defined as a "civil right", even if that lifestyle normally breaks the law. I don't think the Gay Rights Activists would want that, because one of those lifestyle choices might be "I choose to actively discriminate against homosexuals".
|
What proof do you have that homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice"? Even if you could prove it were a lifestyle choice ( I have seen many try and fail) how can you reconcile the fact that we protect the civil rights of people based on thier religion- which is certainly and unequivocially a lifestyle choice?
We also do protect civil rights based on gender- which is what the gay marrigae issue is really about. If two people of different genders can marry, than to be equal for all, two people of the same gender can marry as well. It is basic logic.
[ 11-04-2004, 09:55 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]