The thing I was trying to say, when I brought up the race thing, was that I believe that if you put any of these civil rights issues up for a vote you are making a big mistake.
I consider gay marriage to be a civil rights issue.
If men and woman are truely equal than it makes no sense, absolutely no sense, that marriage should be defined in a sexist way. Why should the fact that it was that way for thousands of years make any difference? Men and woman did not have equal rights for thousands of years, but they do now.
Don't be afraid, move forward boldly.
Marriage should not be defined by religious persuasion, race, age (above age of consent) or sex. Marriage is a basic right not owned by any one group.
I don't think it should matter where you live, civil rights should be protected by the courts, not dictated by the majority by referendum.
I think the topic of gay marriage is long overdue, it should have been settled during the civil rights era. Why wait another 30 years to fix this inequity?
VXkween I'm glad you showed up. Sometimes I feel like very few here agree with me at all.
On a broader topic, at the core of how I feel about all these issues we've discussed so far is that I think we should keep moving forward, change things boldly without fear.
For example: Why waste time blocking embryonic stem cell research? Wouldn't it be more constructive to be focusing on creating a new set of foreward looking laws to govern the ethics of genetic engineering; issues like stem cell research, gene engineering, and human cloning rather than being fearful and trying to block them from happening?
I wish the debate in the country only revolved around how to give indviduals even more rights and freedoms not less. How to move science ahead faster and faster rather than how to hold it back.
Reply With Quote