Dear Mary...

In article . net, Steven P.
McNicoll says...


"Firelock" wrote in message
. com...

A government decision solely based on which genitals
the government thinks are between the legs of the citizens
affected by the decision. What else could it be except
for discrimination based on sex?


It's not a government decision.



Whose decision was it then?

-Tom

"I know up on top you are seeing great sights, but down on the bottom we, too,
should have rights!" ~Yertle the Turtle, by Dr. Seuss

UMA Lemming 404 Local member, 404th MTN(LI)

Replacement_Tommel wrote:

"I know up on top you are seeing great sights, but down on the bottom we, too,
should have rights!" ~Yertle the Turtle, by Dr. Seuss

I haven't seen that one for a while - though I had it almost memorized
at one point from reading it too many times. And I think I can *still*
recite a good bit of One Fish Two Fish from memory. . .

(Emma Anne) writes:

Replacement_Tommel wrote:

"I know up on top you are seeing great sights, but down on the bottom we, too,
should have rights!" ~Yertle the Turtle, by Dr. Seuss

I haven't seen that one for a while - though I had it almost memorized
at one point from reading it too many times. And I think I can *still*
recite a good bit of One Fish Two Fish from memory. . .

Shameful parenting #517: I used to turn two or three pages of "One
Fish Two Fish" at the same time when my kids would insist on me
reading it to them.

Doug Anderson wrote:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Larry Kessler" wrote:

*AS*WE*DEFINE*IT* yes, it does.

Now you're catching on!

But you, clearly, are not.

The point of this is that marriage is a concept defined by humans and
subject to redefinition from time to time.

Really? Okay, I want to marry a sheep. There. It's done. Marriage now
includes unions of humans and animals.

Redefining marriage to permit members of the same sex to enter into it
would not remove the legal requirement that they both be capable of
informed consent. Sheep can't give informed consent, because they
lack the mental ability to understand the concept of marriage. Sorry
to disappoint you.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Douglas Berry" wrote:

Can the sheep give informed consenst, either by signing its name or by
making a mark witnessed by a court officicial attesting that it
understands the obligations of marriage. Go look up the word
"consent." To be married one must be a consensting adult.

Not if I choose to define it otherwise.

You aren't the one doing the defining.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message link.net...
"Firelock" wrote in message
om...

A government decision solely based on which genitals
the government thinks are between the legs of the citizens
affected by the decision. What else could it be except
for discrimination based on sex?


It's not a government decision.

Whose then? Your god's? The *government* is the body that,
when Alex and Sam come in for a marriage license application,
look in Alex and Sam's pants to make sure that they have just
one penis and one vagina between them. Tell me again, why
should we the people impel the government to care?

If you don't want to marry someone of the same sex,
then don't. If you think it is against your religion
for people to do so, then don't join a church that's
willing to perform a religious same-sex marriage service.
If you think that you should be able to tell other
grownups who they can and can't marry, get over yourself.

Walt Smith
Firelock on DALNet
Married 8 years, and still wondering how the marriages
of other people are supposed to harm my own.

"Larry Kessler" wrote in message
...

But you, clearly, are not.


If it seems that way to you you do not understand the issue.



Redefining marriage to permit members of the same sex to enter into it
would not remove the legal requirement that they both be capable of
informed consent. Sheep can't give informed consent, because they
lack the mental ability to understand the concept of marriage. Sorry
to disappoint you.


If marriage can be arbitrarily redefined to include members of the same sex
then it can also be redefined to remove informed consent.

"Larry Kessler" wrote in message
...

You aren't the one doing the defining.


Gays have the right to redefine marriage but animal lovers do not? Why are
you opposed to equal rights?

Larry Kessler wrote:
--cut--
Redefining marriage to permit members of the same sex to enter into it
would not remove the legal requirement that they both be capable of
informed consent. Sheep can't give informed consent, because they
lack the mental ability to understand the concept of marriage. Sorry
to disappoint you.

That's a slippery slope that you're treading there Larry...you're
saying that before a human can consent to marriage he/she could
be challenged to show that he/she has the mental capacity to
understand the concept of marriage. Pretty hard to prove I'd say.
--

-Gord.