Sarah Wrote:Integrity of marriage hahaha.
It's a title that people get to show off; it has no meaning. It's not a right, but it's not a privilege that should be withheld from any group solely because the idea of sharing that title makes them uncomfortable. And that's all it is. I guess we should kick gays off our buses and out of our stores too. Sharing that space with them gives me the willies and God (or some ancient parchment) says it's unnatural for a flamer to eat fruit.
Marriage lost it's integrity long ago thanks to adulterers and people who just stopped caring about how "scared" it was; and oh yeah, they're all straight. So this "right" is not only fine for you to withhold but for you to abuse until it's nothing but a joke, and even then it's too good for homosexuals? Right.
I never said marriage was a "right." He was listing examples including the right for determining situations like "euthanasia" and other factors supposedly linked to being achieved via marriage. I said that the concept of marriage should be separated from those rights and that those issues should be contested individually by homosexuals or any individuals for that matter instead of practically trying to gain those rights via arguing the topic of marriage.
Again I'm arguing what I think "should" happen. I understand that practically speaking the "should" often gets in the way of achieving results and real accomplishments.