Amended marriage bill is unacceptable

[Natasha]

Amended marriage bill is unacceptable

http://www.cmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090509/OPINION/905090321/1029/OPINION03
Megan Macmullin
5/9/09

While the Monitor tells us that the same-sex marriage bill, as amended, simply involves some tinkering of the wording in the original bill, that could not be further from the truth.

The real danger from the amendment exists in the new definition of marriage itself: "the legally recognized union of two people . . . regardless of gender." These words make this legislation unacceptable.

Perhaps the senators who voted for the bill did not understand the differences between "sex" and "gender."

[Annwyn]

Some people will never be satisfied until there is literally NOTHING left to whine about.

Major LOLZ go to all the anonymous posters commenting about this equating to pedophilia or bestiality.  Oh simple minded America.

[Shana A]

Major LOLZ go to all the anonymous posters commenting about this equating to pedophilia or bestiality.  Oh simple minded America.

Let's not forget how this will also lead to polygamy 

Z

[Annwyn]

Polygamy is more than acceptable.  If people wanna have orgies then they'll at least be committed to one another.

Although, most of the ones I've witnessed are more like... big incestuous families differing in age and favor among each other.  I'm quite jealous, they all stick out for each other and all have a strong sense of belonging.

[LadyArwen]

I don't entirely agree with Megan's position. 

Given that most people (and, apparently, all bureaucrats) see the terms 'sex' and 'gender' as synonyms, perhaps this change won't cause any problems.  Only time (and the courts) will tell.

It seems to me that the best way to define marriage is "a voluntary union between any two consenting adults."