jdiebremse wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Charlie Bell <charlie@> wrote:
The former of your definitions has only recently been added to
marriage law in Australia. The latter, well why not? *shrug*
Provided
people make provision for the children of such unions (adopted,
fostered or biological), what business is it of anyone else.
Despite your cavalier attitude - "shrug" - you are, nevertheless,
talking about a dramatic reordering of our basic societal
structure.
What? How? It doesn't change my marriage if my mate and his ?
partner's
relationship is recognised too.
You were just advocating marriages between three or more people....
JDG
Only from a US-centric-vocabulary point of view.
In the places Charlie has lived, "mate" means "buddy", not "fuck-buddy".
Julia
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
