3 ms·
Technically they never had that right and won't until the Supreme Court rules on it. So they aren't taking away anything at all. Currently in the majority of St
by sigzero 14y ago
Technically they never had that right and won't until the Supreme Court rules on it. So they aren't taking away anything at all. Currently in the majority of States "marriage equality" is one man can marry one woman and that applies to everyone.
The big deal is that someone that is "famous" said publicly that he doesn't support gay marriage. The LGBT movement, "tolerant" as they are, just can't have that.
- gergles 14y agoThe Supreme Court did rule on it. In the 60s: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._virginia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._virginia "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... " There is also a significant difference between "not supporting" something and campaigning to prevent anyone from doing it. I "don't support" tax-exempt religion, but I'm not giving money to a lobbying group to try to end it.
- rayiner 14y agoNo, the big deal is that the CEO of a huge company donated millions to fund anti-gay legislation. That's a huge difference.
- kbolino 14y agoInsofar as the discussion remains civil, either both sides are guilty of "intolerance" or neither are. When one side makes unreasonable demands, and carries them into action, then we can begin to discuss an imbalance of tolerance.