"Terry Bolands" wrote in message
om...
"Jim Fisher" wrote in message
. ..
But they can't get married and they can't fly low wing planes. That's
just
they way it is.
It's not "just the way it is". You can feel it is wrong if you want,
but it's not an innate truism that gay people can't get married.
Ahh, but it is a truism if one accept the absolute fact that "marraige" has
been recognized for thousands of years as a religous tenant. We aren't
talking "unions" but marraige. Governemental support of a marraige between
a man and a woman and, thus, protection of the familial unit is supported
and recognized beacause such support has historically contributed to to
overall, long-term survival of governing bodies.
Man+man and woman+woman does NOT a stable family make and does a government
absolutely no good.
This makes it a truism, Terry. You don't have to like it but a rational
person cannot deny it.
To say that "Denying sexually aberrant citizens 'marital' status is akin
to
human rights abuses endured by black Americans" is an affront to my, and
your, intelligence.
Why call it sexually aberrant? I agree, that is an affront to your
intelligence.
"ab·er·rant (br-nt, -br,-)
adj.
1.. Deviating from the proper or expected course.
2.. Deviating from what is normal; untrue to type.
Man+woman - Expected and even proper.
Man+man - Untrue to type
Gay+high wing: Expected and proper.
Straight+low wing: Expected and proper
Woman+Woman - I don't necessarily have a problem with this (marriage or
adoptive rights-wise) but it is still aberrant.
Until the gay population becomes a significant portion of the population,
gay behavior will be considered "abnormal" and "aberrant." You don't have
to like that fact but it is axiomatic.
--
Jim Fisher
|