Vixianna
Offline
Post: 56015823_46 created on Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:34 pmPosted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 6:34 pm
![]() |
ennaelatan Comparing marriage rights with fashion statements is just as wrong as the government telling gay people they can't marry. As for Phantomboy - people involved with the Gay Rights Movement do protest. I don't know if you recall Stonewall? Or if that's too old for you, maybe the march on Washington nearly one month ago? The government hasn't listened yet. That doesn't mean the movement's done or even slowing. It means it's going to try harder. Running naked in the streets? Are you a bigot? Are you really so ignorant? Back on topic now, though. It's absolutely a political issue. Marriage awards rights to heterosexual couples that homosexual couples are never awarded. It shouldn't be an issue, and that's the problem. It should be a given that you should be able to marry the person you're going to spend the rest of your life with. Let's ignore the the argument that wishes to "protect the sanctity of marriage," because the divorce rate speaks louder than a bunch of ignorant and frightened people grasping at straws. Marriage has its political and social aspects. It conveys the idea to everyone around you that you're in love with your partner. It shows that you're committed. Many states in the US do not allow you to adopt unless you're married. That automatically cuts out the gay community. If it's to be put to a vote, then I say that heterosexual marriages should be put to a vote. Let's be fair, this is the US after all. EDIT: I could list all the differences between Civil Unions (this is what gay couples are sometimes, depending on the state, allowed to have in place of marriage) and Civil Marriages, but there's about a thousand rights that make the difference. That's a /lot/ of typing. You do realize that's stupid as hell, because it's going to be voted through right? Let's try something that will actually help the Gay community neh? |
|



























