Gay Marriage

[The Jays]

We draw the distinction that a man is different than a woman. Why?? Why don't we just call them both men? Does that distinction mean that men are pure, and women are inferior? Well, I guess so!

He's black, he's white. Obviously, the white man is better than the black man!

So you don't believe that for as long as man has existed that women have been characterized as inferior to men? It's not about calling them both the same, you are being retarded now with that point, it's not a debate about men using womens bathrooms or vice versa, ofcourse women are different from men in apperance. The point is that as long as man has been around and as long as man will be around he will always have someone to call inferior. Which he has done to women, women to this day are not viewed as having the ability to be equal to men in the work force. I am not talking about heavy work like construction, I mean work as in the board room.

Whether its women, blacks, jews, gays, other races, other religions.

I mean distinctions have nothing to do with this, yes a female is not a male but you are going sooooooo beyond any logic with your argument.

Women until maybe the last 15-20 years were nowhere near as commonplace in the workforce as they are today. Women couldn't be leaders, executives, lawyers because men made them feel inferior.

You really need to step back and think about this really thoroughly.

Let's just make seperate categories for marriage then for race, religion and sexual orientation by your standards since its ok to split things up.

We are talking about two different things. The point about women being looked down as inferior to men? That is a cultural issue. The government cannot make laws which which infringe upon the rights of others; they cannot make laws which say who is better and who is inferior. It is the culture which says that one is superior, the other inferior.

I am not even talking about the culture of a people. I have simply been trying to look at it from a matter of law, rights, etc that are protetected by the Constitution.

You can't make a law that tells people to think in a certain way.

Even though as you said before "they had the same legal rights", rights are one thing but its the ability to enforce them fully thats another thing.

I'm not even trying to get into how they enforce rights, I'm just trying to make an arguement has to how both would receive the same rights by law. I havent a clue how the culture would receive the idea of having a gay marriage and a straight marriage which received the same rights, because gay marriages/civil unions with the same rights and benefits are not allowed to happen yet.

Let's just make seperate categories for marriage then for race, religion and sexual orientation by your standards since its ok to split things up.

I don't understand. We already do this. There's African-American, Causcasian, Asian, Arab, etc. There's Catholic, Jewish, Anglican, Muslim, Buddist, etc. There's heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, etc.

I mean, what ever happened to the idea of celebrating the differences of one another?