View Single Post
Old 03-22-2004, 10:07 AM   #15 (permalink)
animosity
on fire
 
animosity's Avatar
 
Location: Atlanta, GA
the point of the article is not that marrage is religious or state... it is too close to define, what he wants is a clear definition between a civil union(called a marriage) and a religious union(called a marriage)... i think he has a very good point... im not at all for or against gay marriage... its not my battle, however i do think that non married couples should be able to have the same benifits as married ones wether the couple is hetero, homo or some other crazy sexual thing i havnt even heard of... but once you do that, when is a couple intitled to such a union, and how would one disolve such a thing?

Last edited by animosity; 03-22-2004 at 11:01 AM..
animosity is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76