50 to 48 = 2 missing

They are absent quite often, especially on issues they don't want to touch. Such as the one at hand.

I think that's the point he was trying to make.


Personally, I have absolutely no problem. Name one problem gay marriage will cause you. The answer is it won't affect you at all, you just enjoy being homophobic and don't want them to have any of the rights us "normal" people have.

It used to be that the gays 'just wanted to be left alone' - and that's all they wanted. Society gave that to them. Now it's not good enough and they're asking for marital rights. Where does the line get drawn? Who's to say that bigomy is wrong, or incest, or beastiality, or ... ?

My beef is that a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Is it at gay marriage? I'd venture to say that >3/4 of America would say so.

Daseal, I should have been more clear than "what did he say", I should have asked how has Kerry said he'll be the better choice? I mean anyone can say we need to remove the troops. But how will he effectively do that?....Besides I thought he said he would add troops now that we're there anyway

For the Redskins angle: If Kerry wins the election I'm picking former Redskins coach George Allen's son, George Allen II (or is it Junior?) as a darkhorse GOP candidate in 2008. You heard it here first!!!....

Yeah, I think George Allen would be a great candidate. He's just biding his time, I think.

i helped his campaign for senate (as a grunt worker) as a req for my civics class in HS... he's a nice guy, but i would never touch campaign work for anyone again, its definately not my thing.

and daseal, you remind me of a story about how all the animals on a farm are equal, except the pigs, which are more equal than anyone else...

slippery slope arguements don't always hold up that well, and i don't agree with that statement that gay == beastiality, or that granting gay marriage would in any way assume that bestiality will follow.

I didn't say that gay == beastiality. I was saying that in the name of rights, people will continually and gradually request more and more 'freedoms' that fly in the face of what has traditionally been determined uncouth. I understand that in certain situations, a slippery slope argument does not hold up well, but when talking about the progression of US culture and society, it more often than not will hold up.

(You must be a programmer - you used '==' instead of just '=' :D)

I love the argument that if gay marriage is allowed then before we know it people will be marrying barn yard animals or their sisters. Ridiculous.

Comparing gay marriage to beastiality and incest is apples and oranges and quite frankly is pretty insulting to gay people.

Gay people just want the same rights everyone else has, why is that too much to ask?

I'm saying that because of the gays, the people who engage in those other acts will want their actions to be taken seriously if the gay lifestyle is promoted within legislation.

I'm saying that a line has to be drawn.

yeah you caught me cpayne... if i used =, then i'd be assigning beastality to gay, and i'm not sure that that's kosher...

this is about equal rights, not barnyard sex acts... people won't want to marry the sheep after all... at least, not most i'd hope.

oh yeah, bigomy is tolerated in some places in our country, that line has been crossed (since the founding)... among farming families it wasn't unheard of (when the husband dies in an accident etc), but its legal in salt lake today. The slope's done slipped already.

A line has already been drawn, incest and beastiality are unaccepted and illegal lifestyles in society unlike homosexuality.

It's not an excuse that holds much water.