"Try to substantiate, BakerStreet. "

No, it has been hashed out time and again. That was the point of my post. Feel free to chime in as you like but I would prefer not to debate style with you.

I do not opose the gay marriage. I am even keen toward their relationships having all the social benefits that heterosexual marriages do, but calling it marriage is a beginning of an unprecedented process.

The only issue I have with gay mariages is that at one point they'll demand to be equal to real mariages on a higher level and start to raise children, or even demand adoption rights. Perhaps the children from their relationship will be just as normal as the rest of the kids but it's not a risk I'm wiling to take. Assume for a moment you died and your children are to be adopted. you might not have a problem with that, mind you - I would.

One thing is certain - it's not the same as with races - gay mariage may not procreate without a help from outside of the relationship.

As Psychx said, you are all missing the real point. I think we should all concentrate of Janet Jackson at the superbowl and whether or not baseball players are on steroids. I mean these are real issues we Americans need to resolve and then we can get to this.

new-age nomad - 2/28/2004 4:03:12 PM

"I agree with Jamie, except of course for the part of him agreeing with you..."
I love it.

Hey, if it's not socially legal or acceptable for me to have a half dozen wives to care for all my needs then why should gays be able to get married?

I already tried that, Brad, and the persons in other discussions said they were fine with polygamy if it meant getting gay marraige approved. Can you imagine bi-sexual polygamist marraiges?

Background: I basically think that the “gay marriage” idea is the wrong way to go. It has too much of a spiritual connotation to it and that’s what the people are reacting to. The next course of action is a civil union. But this has its own problems as well. Namely, a civil union granted in one state will not automatically be valid in another state. This could be why they are pushing for the marriage aspect. Since marriage is recognized at the Federal level, the union would be valid in all states.

Question: How could it be arranged to have a civil union recognized across all state lines? How was it done with mixed marriages back in the 60s? I know some states or cities had legal prohibitions against it, how was it finally resolved?

IG