 | | Re: Marriage (was: Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee)
|
|
(...) First, I am not saying that 2 men or 2 women can't raise a family. What I am asking is: All things being equal, is it better that a child has a mother? All things being equal, is it better that a child has a father? Each sex is unique, each (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
|
|
(...) I fear we are not on the same wavelength here. I think Larry addressed my concern: (URL) private verses public> (...) Well, in the original, the government was involved. From the beginning I posed my question assuming no governmental (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Marriage (was: Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee)
|
|
(...) Why? You keep saying that, but I don't to see *why* it's obvious. Can you spell out the real advantages of 1 man/1 woman? What, exactly, does it have over other unions that makes it the superior way of raising children? My experience with (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Marriage (was: Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee)
|
|
(...) When you speak about the issue in terms of contract recognition, sure it seems obvious. But doesn't this seem painfully obvious as well: men and women are not the same. The are not simply humans with irrelevant, interchangable reproduction (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
|
|
(...) Sadly, (and from the perspective of) for the future of the republic, I'm not sure that's really worth being debated either, as it appears to be a settled question that he can make mileage from this issue and a mostly irrelevant question (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote: (snip worthy summation) (...) Agreed. Its validity seems to flow rather directly and consequentially from some deeply enshrined and rather important principles concerning the fundamental rights of (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
|
|
(...) Bruce's big joke only gets funnier. Richard Still baldly going... (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
|
|
(...) Yes, they do. As long as the forsake any governmental affiliation is strictly adhered to. That's tough to do today though. (...) But LUGNET, being completely privately funded, ought to (under the free association clause) be completely within (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
|
|
(...) What does membership in a private club have to do with forcing gays out of their own private property? And, just to address your example, the fictional "Todd" may well have to justify his reason, and to a judge, depending on the Terms of (...) (21 years ago, 19-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Yet another push for thoughtful legislation from Tennessee
|
|
(...) If I am Todd, isn't that my right? Need I justify my reasons? And to whom? (...) I think the ratio is a lot higher for other reasons. I like this (from their web site): (URL) Fetal Rights> You might suppose that the ACLU might be concerned (...) (21 years ago, 18-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
