Interesting points. But, we’re not allowed to have any such discussions. The liberal homosexual activists have decided that it has to be marriage for.their relationships legal status. Liberal judges agree, such as when the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that that state’s civil union law amounted to discrimination.
If homosexual activists weren’t trying to shove this down our throats through the courts, it would be possible to discuss some of these issues. But they have poisoned the well, labeled all who oppose homosexual marriage as haters, etc. The media does the same. Would be nice to have a civilized discussion of how marriage ought to be defined.
Saw a professional photography magazine with the cover date of October 2012.
It covered wedding photography (at least part of the issue did) and even devoted at least one page (and several other photos) to same sex weddings.
There was a list of things that can be different about photographing such ceremonies (often not held in a church, sometimes one or both sets of parents don’t attend so group photos may be unbalanced, using gender neutral terms and avoiding using explicitly traditional couple phrases like “bride and groom” on your website (use “brides and grooms” instead).
Then it went into some photographers who SPECIALIZE in homosexualist wedding photography. We’ve seen the lavender mafia take social conservatives to court for rejecting the photography of a same sex wedding. Would there likewise be a legal challenge if a photographer said (s)he SPECIALIZED in HETEROSEXUAL wedding photography?
Down is up. Wrong is right. This so called tolerance and equality for the politically protected class is BULLSTALIN. There is no tolerance for “diversity”. If you challenge them, you are to be persecuted/prosecuted but if they niche market, they are to be celebrated.
BIOLOGY