Dear Mary...

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Larry Kessler" wrote:

Gays are not allowed to marry the consenting, non-related adult of
their choice in the US. Heterosexuals are.

Gays are allowed to marry any consenting, non-related adult of the opposite
sex in the US, just as heterosexuals are. They are treated exactly the
same.

Including the phrase "of the opposite sex" makes their treatment very
UNequal. Not to reopen the old
gay-marriage-vis-a-vis-black-equal-rights debate again, it's more like
the issue of permitting people of different races to marry, which was
illegal in many states until 1967.

You could have said that black people are just as free to marry within
their race as white people are, so there's no unfair treatment; but
that disingenuously ignores the plight of couples who fall in love but
are of different races.

The right to marry someone of the opposite sex is as worthless to a
gay person as the "right" to beg for food and sleep under bridges
would be to a wealthy person. The law forbids both rich and poor to
do so, but only affects the poor.

In Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court confirmed that marriage is a
right, and I predict that when this issue reaches the USSC (as it
eventually must) they will make a similar ruling on this issue, using
LvV as precedent.

--
Delete the numerals from my email address to reply.

"George Z. Bush" wrote:

Larry Kessler wrote:
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


"Magda" wrote:

I'll repeat myself (and others) : luckily for humanity, US is NOT the
only country on Earth, and in THREE OTHER COUNTRIES gays
are already allowed to marry, and it's just the beginning.

Gays are allowed to marry in the US.

Gays are not allowed to marry the consenting, non-related adult of
their choice in the US. Heterosexuals are.

And what was that that was going on in San Francisco's City Hall all of last
week? Or did somebody cut off SF and float it out to sea and it's no longer
part of the US?

That was the beginning of the end of the prohibition on same-sex
marriages. In most of the USA, my statement still holds true.

--
Delete the numerals from my email address to reply.

"Larry Kessler" wrote in message
...

Including the phrase "of the opposite sex" makes their treatment very
UNequal.


The phrase "of the opposite sex" is superfluous as marriage requires persons
of the opposite sex anyway. Homosexuals are treated no differently than
heterosexuals with regard to marriage.

"Larry Kessler" wrote in message
...

That was the beginning of the end of the prohibition on same-sex
marriages. In most of the USA, my statement still holds true.


Same-sex marriage is not prohibited, it's simply impossible.

Lo, many moons past, on Tue, 02 Mar 2004 20:23:32 GMT, a stranger
called by some "Steven P. McNicoll"
came forth and told this tale in us.military.army


"Larry Kessler" wrote in message
.. .

That was the beginning of the end of the prohibition on same-sex
marriages. In most of the USA, my statement still holds true.


Same-sex marriage is not prohibited, it's simply impossible.

No, it isn't. It's happening across the US now.


--

Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail

WE *ARE* UMA
Lemmings 404 Local

"Douglas Berry" wrote in message
...

It's happening across the US now.


No it isn't. Many ignorant people only think it is.

Lo, many moons past, on Wed, 03 Mar 2004 18:00:09 GMT, a stranger
called by some "Steven P. McNicoll"
came forth and told this tale in us.military.army


"Douglas Berry" wrote in message
.. .

It's happening across the US now.

No it isn't. Many ignorant people only think it is.

OK, you've reached delusional status now.

3,500 marriage licenses have been issued in San Francisco. Portland,
Oregon started issuing them today.

They will soon be coming to MA.

You can pout and whine all you want, but the fact is that same-sex
marriages are a reality. Deal with it.

I'm finished with you until you actually develop an argument beyond
"because I said so."
--

Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail

WE *ARE* UMA
Lemmings 404 Local

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Larry Kessler" wrote:

Including the phrase "of the opposite sex" makes their treatment very
UNequal.

The phrase "of the opposite sex" is superfluous as marriage requires persons
of the opposite sex anyway.

*AS*WE*DEFINE*IT* yes, it does. At one time, marriage was defined as
the union of one man and one woman both of the same race, since
interracial marriages were as illegal as gay marriages are now in most
places. Long ago, and even today in some places, marriage was/is
defined as the union of one man and as many women as he can support.

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

--
__________Delete the numerals from my email address to respond__________
"I am angry that so many of the sons of the powerful and well-placed...
managed to wangle slots in Reserve and National Guard units...Of the
many tragedies of Vietnam, this raw class discrimination strikes me
as the most damaging to the ideal that all Americans are created equal
and owe equal allegiance to their country."
-- Colin Powell’s autobiography, My American Journey, p. 148

"Douglas Berry" OK, you've reached delusional status now.

3,500 marriage licenses have been issued in San Francisco. Portland,
Oregon started issuing them today.

They will soon be coming to MA.

You can pout and whine all you want, but the fact is that same-sex
marriages are a reality. Deal with it.

I'm finished with you until you actually develop an argument beyond
"because I said so."
--

Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail


Although I don't share Steve's ideas about gay marriage, I would agree when
he says that gay marriages are not occurring yet. Essentially, until the
courts rule otherwise or the laws are changed, all that seems to be
happening in the places you mentioned is a nice ceremony (similar to a
birthday party say) accompanied by a bogus piece of paper. This doesn't
fulfil the legal definition of marriage in the US.

As to Steve's statements about gay marriage not being possible, I think he
has overstated his doctrinal beliefs. I am guessing that he means Christian
gay marriages are not possible. I would be curious to know if he thinks
Hindu, Mormon, Muslim, etc. marriages are possible, or if marriage is
possible between all men an all women regardless of faith since the
Christian Bible defines marriage in Christian terms only as far as I know.
In other words, how do you mesh the religious and secular ideas of marriage?

Jarg

Lo, many moons past, on Thu, 04 Mar 2004 18:18:16 GMT, a stranger
called by some "Jarg" came forth and
told this tale in us.military.army

Although I don't share Steve's ideas about gay marriage, I would agree when
he says that gay marriages are not occurring yet. Essentially, until the
courts rule otherwise or the laws are changed, all that seems to be
happening in the places you mentioned is a nice ceremony (similar to a
birthday party say) accompanied by a bogus piece of paper. This doesn't
fulfil the legal definition of marriage in the US.

In the US, marriages are handled by county registars. Not the states,
not the federal government. Those marriages might only be legal in a
singal county now, they are marriages.


--

Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail

WE *ARE* UMA
Lemmings 404 Local