Quote:
Originally Posted by Infinite_Loser
Never said it was. I did say, however, that gays are not being "discriminated" against any more than a person in any of those other groups are.
|
It was implied. By saying their discrimination is categorically the same as the discrimination against those who want to marry children, multiple partners, or animals, but is categorically different than the previously discriminated interracial couples, it implies that you are comparing homosexual marriage more to the marriage of children, multiple partners, and animals than you are to interracial marriage. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Quote:
|
What do you mean by "a legitimate form of romantic relationship"? It's not considered legitimate, otherwise it would be legal (In the U.S.).
|
Socially and sexually legitimate.
Quote:
|
I didn't know that "having a relationship" meant "being married". The only "message" this sends is that marriage is defined as one man and one woman, thus prohibiting persons who want to engage in a marriage outside of these parameters from doing so.
|
So "marriage" means "heterosexual marriage." This is what is at issue: this antiquated definition of
marriage.
Quote:
|
I thought they were after marriage for the legal benefits.
|
Although I'm sure this is a common desire, it is a faulty generalization to assume that this is all they want.
Quote:
|
I'm pretty sure this has been asked a gazillion times now, but why should they be allowed to marry?
|
Because it legitimizes their families. It allows for the state and/or religious acceptance of their monogamous interpersonal relationships so that they can maintain their families with the same status as everyone else.