|
|
|
No sir, I don't like it
|
 |
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: USA! USA!
|
|
Dec 21st, 2008, 09:28 PM
How spoiled we are, when we claim victimhood and prejudice when we don't get everything we want.
Make no mistake, I'm not an opponent of gay people, nor have I ever been. But this is about changing the definition of an institution. I'm not comparing homosexuality to anything bad, but why shouldn't we change the definition of marriage to allow marriage to multiple wives, husbands, even animals and inanimate objects? Doesn't everyone deserve to be happy?
Too often have I seen Americans berate their country, but only talk about our "bountiful freedoms" when they feel that they're at a risk.
I'm 100% behind letting gay people have an exact replica of marriage with a different name. It's a monogamous partnership, which is what our country values. But, if you're going to change the rules, you also need to change the name.
| |
__________________
I was debating going to an erotic fair held at a nightclub in town just for the sake of being awkward, which is exactly what happened.
-Sethomas, Cunning Linguist
| |
|
|
Threaded Mode
