Quote:
Originally posted by BlackRedGold25+Mar 23 2005, 03:12 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (BlackRedGold25 @ Mar 23 2005, 03:12 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-RougeUnderoos@Mar 23 2005, 12:19 AM
No. This is a country split on granting basic human rights and equality to a small but vocal minority.
|
Who is deprived of any rights?
No one in this country is unable to get married.
And in terms of same sex unions, no one is arguing that they shouldn't have the same rights as married couples. What they are arguing about, and wasting tax dollars at the same time, is about what they are calling same sex unions. Instead of calling it a same sex union or some other term they are lumping it in with marriage.
Because a small subsection of the population has nothing better to with their time, money is being wasted on something even more frivilous then the gun registry. [/b][/quote]
Why shouldn't it be called a marriage? As I pointed out, there are already two different forms of marriage. They aren't the same, so don't say that there is an 'established' term for what marriage means.
If the church can live with the government marrying people who are not religious at all, they can damn well live with two people of the same sex being married. The church shouldn't even factor into it anyway.
It might be frivolous to you...but you most likely aren't the one that is being denied the privilege. Easy to say in your position.
And I agree with you, money and time is being wasted on it. Problem is, it isn't the minority asking for the right to marriage that is the party that is wasting money. It is the other party that is against it that is putting up a big fuss over nothing and wasting time and money.