> Scott wrote: > But aren't Civil Unions the same as taking the marriage ceremony out of > the equation?
The terms are irrelevant save one: equality. As long as every legal adult has access to all of the same rights under all of the same titles I'm for it. If there any distinction in title or function of right or liberties based on sexual preference then I oppose it. Here's an analogy: Let's say you install public water fountains. At each location you install 2 spigots and call one a bubbler and the other a fountain. You then create a law that says white people can drink from both bubblers and fountains but black people can only drink from fountains. Under your devil's advocate logic, both group are provided with equal function so there's no problem. Under my logic, that's discrimination. People say "God intended a man and a woman ..." or "nature dictates that a man and a woman" Well people used to say that black people were born to be slaves. That's what nature intended. We've progressed. Gay rights are next. It just takes some people longer to realize their hypocrisy. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:278991 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
