#74 Jack
“The only thing you are whining about is the name that is put on it and prohibiting them from the civil benefits.”
What? Whining? I am debating the meaning of the word ‘marriage’. I am saying the meaning should not be changed because some group wants it to be changed.
“Don’t worry about the “many activists” for two seconds and stop assuming the worst.”
YOU began the assuming and credited those against redefining marriage as having evil intentions against homosexuals.
If you want to debate whether the man, man, and woman, woman, relationships should have benefits and protections under the law that is fine but I won’t debate it now in this forum. That is a distraction to what THIS debate is about, which is activists and judges redefining marriage to mean other than a man and woman becoming husband and wife.
I really don’t know how many times I can say the same thing. You just keep throwing other arguments into the discussion that distract from what the country is facing with a judicial system that is playing word games, in my opinion, to cause confusion. I also believe that changing the meaning of marriage will cause further confusion, and it is unnecessary to do so in order for other groups to gain rights and protections.
