Replies

Nice attempt at spin, but it doesn't wash.... you can ignore reality and pretend like you have a meaning argument... most activists do that all the time.

Policies are not made by fringes but by the whole. Heterosexual marriage is an institution that creates the next generation of citizens and as such there is an argument that can be made for government having any sort of role in the relationship... homosexual activity NEVER can do to that and as such there is absolutely no reason for government to ever sanction, sanctify or codify the relationships.

Two gays want to "union" they can do it all day long... they want to set out how the relationship should work, they can sit down and write a binding contract... there is absolutely no reason at all for the government to ever have a interest or a reason to be involved in homosexual relationships.

Period. Spin away, but that's the truth.

I told you not to waste my time. You first set out an "only for procreation" test for marriage. Then, when your (ludicrous) test is shown to threaten some heterosexual marriages that no sane person should want barred, you change the subject and avoid explaining by referring to "fringes" and "wholes."

I think you mean "hole," as in, the Mack-truck-sized one in your, uh, "argument." Nice whipping you.