Today we had a field trip to the state Capitol to go to a historical Lewis and Clark movie and to visit the California Museum of History, Women, and the Arts. Well, the movie was nice, the museum was tedious, and lunch was quite delicious (caesar salad, blackberry italian soda, and a lemon bar, if you must know). When we came back to the bus area,
(
Read more... )
Comments 5
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Of course, it's all a matter of interpretation, but it would seem that if they passed an amendment banning gay marriage, the constitution would contradict itself.
Reply
People can be utterly retarded. I hate that the only thing I can ever do, though, is ask: WHY? what's WRONG? Don't you understand EMOTION, you stupid PEOPLE?!
I once had someone tell me that it didn't matter anyways, since gay couples never stay together; they're not happy together. It was the most retarded argument I have ever heard.
Reply
That can go both ways, too. Even that ridiculous argument wouldn't be valid.
By keeping same sex couples apart, wouldn't that encourage them to seek others of the opposite gender? Well, no it wouldn't, but that's the aim, right? I'm not exactly clear as to how people expect a homosexual person to find happiness in a heterosexual relationship. It would be like forcing "straight" people into the opposite situation.
The whole anti-gay marriage movement is backed by seditious reasoning.
Reply
When you put it that way, though, a lot more people would probably think twice about supporting it. (Or maybe I'm missing one of the points of anti-incest.)
(Though I don't, my any means, support incestuous procreation. Messing about with genes like that is dangerous.)
(I don't think that made any sense, soz. The crouton goodness is scrambling my brain.)
Reply
Leave a comment