[Steel Wolf]

you would seem to be saying that if black slaves had the ability to be white, and therefore no longer slaves, then it would be ok to enslave the ones that chose not to be white... is that about right???

No.

Also, the question is loaded, and I'll explain why.

Slavery, in the American experience, was white enslaving black. In most of world history, from the islands of SE Asia to the corners of Africa and all through Asia, it was generally people who looked the same enslaving each other. I'm sure you knew that, but I'm just reminding you that our experience with slavery was unusual.

So, if people could change skin color at will, it wouldn't change anything. Slavery is not a synonmy for racism, it's a coercive social system that exists for economic reasons. Morally, slavery is a sin of the master. Masters will always find a reason to be in charge, and always find more people to enslave, until broken of the habit by force.

But to play with your analogy here, of 'master' and 'hetero' to 'slave' and 'gay', here's the problem. Aside from the marriage issue, which is a unique social status for men and women to raise children in, heteros and gays are legally the same. Gay individuals aren't working in the fields for whip wielding heteros. They can do anything, biology notwithstanding, that heteros individuals can.

The reason they don't have marriage, is that they don't qualify. There is no gay culture, gay language, gay history, or gay ethnic group. There is no gay traditions to be passed to future generations because there are no future generations. Homosexuals by definition don't generate. Even if they get a piece of paper that says 'Marriage license' on it, they will never be anything more than a couple agreeing not to have sex with other people.

So, comparing them to black African slaves, who lost their culture, language, history, and tribal ties, is silly. We kidnapped a group of people and stole everything from them, including their identity, and put them to work for centuries. That has zero to do with denying two guys in drag a piece of paper to help them feel normal. Trying to equate what our slaves suffered to the collective whining of some sexual hobbyists is odious and illogical.

[the_apocalypse]

i would agree that gays have it much better off in 2004 than slaves ever did. for millions and millions of people, a marriage license is just a piece of paper that says a couple wont have sex with other people. plenty of people get married with no plans of having children, and plenty get married that can't have children. i've never heard it argued that they shouldn't be married because they can't or don't want to reproduce.