Homosexual campaign: Could someone explain this?

[AshevilleApp]

They should not, however, expect to get any reduced rent or other special priveldges at PUBLIC AREAS. That is the point of contention. Why should MY TAX DOLLARS go to give benefits to a group that EXCLUDES a segment of the population?

Agreed.

So, as a white male, why should my tax dollars go to give benefits to a group that EXCLUDES a segment of the population? Why should benefits go towards helping, exclusively, minorities?

I'll be waiting.

Which benefits go towards helping, exclusively, minorities? Honest question here, I'm curious.

[Ibanez]

So you don't want to pay for Medicare or Medicaid? Jon, your tax dollars go to so many programs of exclusion. As I told D1b, every group on earth discriminates in some way. You don't see fat ballerina's, slow base ball players, white leaders of the NAACP.

How is playing baseball or being a member of the NAACP equal to being able to enter into marriage recognized by our government and sharing in the special financial and other privileges that legalized marriage entails?????

You missed the point. The point is that you will not find an all inclusive group or organization. Discrimination, on some level, exists and will continue to exist. A better example would Medicare. Jon pays taxes that support Medicare, which has discriminating conditions. No matter what, the taxes you pay will probably go to an organization, that in some way, shape or form, excludes people (good or bad).

[mainejeff]

How is playing baseball or being a member of the NAACP equal to being able to enter into marriage recognized by our government and sharing in the special financial and other privileges that legalized marriage entails?????

The point is that you will not find an all inclusive group or organization. Discrimination, on some level, exists and will continue to exist.

You would think that our Federal Government would be all inclusive though as it relates to consenting adults entering into a legalized marriage.

[Ibanez]

The point is that you will not find an all inclusive group or organization. Discrimination, on some level, exists and will continue to exist.

You would think that our Federal Government would be all inclusive though as it relates to consenting adults entering into a legalized marriage.

Your faith in our Governments ability to be fair is frightening.

The government can only benefit from allowing gays to marriage. It's the religions that are having a shit storm. These politicians seem to forget that you don't have to be married by a church. Once again, what's good for the goose is bad for the gander.

[JohnStOnge]

Just because 2 women love each other does not mean that shouldn't have the oppurtunity to be married. They are not equating a Gay marriage to a Straight Marriage. They want the equal oppurtunity.

Again, there is no denial of equal opportunity involved. Once marriage is defined however it's defined there is no lack of equal opportunity as long as everyone is eligible for it. Either one of the two women you describe above can, if they wish, enter into a marriage arrangement as it is defined just like anybody else can. For some reason we keep going full circle and back around to saying that a person deciding that they don't want to enter into marriage as marriage is defined constitutes equal opportunity.

No matter how you define marriage, if you put any limits on it at all, you are potentially going to be denying someone recognition of some relationship or set of relationships that they might prefer. The only way you're going to create a situation where there is "equal opportunity" with respect to marriage is construed as meaning that one can have any relationship they happen to prefer recognized as "marriage" is to say there is no definition of "marriage" except to say that any relationship or set of relationships can be recognized as such.