🚀 go-pugleaf

mikep@sr.hp.com (Mike Powell) wrote:
>
> 	It is perhaps beyond the scope of this thread to expand fully
> 	on this subject, but suffice it to say that marriage... around
> 	the world and throughout history... has an amazing degree of
> 	fundimental consistancy. This is true despite the fact that no
> 	single entity "owns" or "promotes" marriage.  The reason for
> 	this is because the basic concept of marriage stems _fully_
> 	from the basic realities of our biology.  All of humanity has
> 	been under pressures to form arrangements that we call 'marriage'.
> 	The details differ, but the basics, by a pragmatic imposition,
> 	are all the same. BUT *same-sex* marriage _totally_ severs itself
> 	from the fundimental pressures which gave birth to traditions/
> 	structures of marriage.  This changes marriage on it's most
> 	fundimental level... creating a major devaluation away from it's
> 	primary benefit to humanity, and moving toward a valuation of
> 	the details of transient legal issues.
> 
> 	This is bad news.

This is total bull-shit.  For centuries, marriage has been about not just 
biology/sex/children, but economics.  How does "*same-sex*" marriage 
have any bearing on this (perhaps more now than ever before) aspect of 
the marriage concept.