"A. Krieghund" wrote in message
news:ltrga1pbkqandd7pt2urt9h9m2kkr2i55m@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 09 Jun 2005 00:59:14 GMT, "Andrealphus"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"A. Krieghund" wrote in message
>>news:ivtea1tj88gclpg1t2vrag631k9p4fjjg3@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 08 Jun 2005 08:46:59 -0400, "L. Michael Roberts"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Advocates of same-. marriage are generally not asking that the laws
>>>>pertaining to marriage be changed... only that the eligibility
>>>>requirements for who may enter into the civil contract be changed so as
>>>>to remove . discrimination.
>>>
>>> There is no . discrimination in the USA. Males and females are
>>> permitted to marry.
>>
>>A female is not allowed to marry a female, which is a right that males
>>have.
>>Discrimination by definition.
>>
>>A male are not allowed to marry a male, which is a right that females
>>have.
>>Discrimination by definition.
>
>
> Neither of which would serve a useful purpose in our society.
In your opinion, which is an irrelevancy. The point is that they both
represent discrimination by definition, and it is up to the state to prove a
compelling, narrowly defined, societal reason for the continuation of such a
ban.
|