[cc2k]

Maybe you have an aversion to logic, or maybe just to the obvious, but if the law defines marriage in a way that precludes gay marriage, there is a law against gay marriage.

You are the one with logic problems.

Following your logic, are you saying that there is a law against me collecting veterans benefits?

I've never served in the military, and I'm probably to old to serve now. Since the law defines veterans in a way that precludes me from being a veteran, there is a law against me collecting veterans benefits. That's not fair. We should change the law so that anyone can be a veteran, regardless of military service.

There is no reason that gays can't get married. However, if it isn't a man and a woman, it's not a marriage. How difficult is that to understand?

[tdadams]

I'm sorry, but that's just a completely disingenuous argument. It's a complete non sequitur. I'm sure you realize that. If you don't realize it, then trying to reason with you is futile.

[gitmo]

Following your logic, are you saying that there is a law against me collecting veterans benefits?

I've never served in the military, and I'm probably to old to serve now. Since the law defines veterans in a way that precludes me from being a veteran, there is a law against me collecting veterans benefits. That's not fair. We should change the law so that anyone can be a veteran, regardless of military service.

If I'm not mistaken, our government applies this logic to taxpayers.