🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4l6lfn$t2n@news.advtech.uswest.com>, dave5@advtech.uswest.com (David Ensign) says:
>
<...>
>
>Since we're defending traditions...flaming is a standing tradition on the
>net, and Mike did it pretty well.  You've been involved in the gay marriage
>debate for long enough.  We shouldn't have to go to a point where we
>have to distinguish ourselves from inanimate objects.  Your argument was just
>plain silly, and offensive on top of that.
>
>d.
                                                                        
Well David, since I respect your opinion (and you managed to reply without
gratituous insults) I apologize for the "inaminate object" phrase.  It 
wasn't meant to be offensive, and I'm sorry if you took it that way.
For your information, someone did once try to marry a horse in Boulder.

My main point (which I notice that nobody has addressed) is that hetero-
sexual marriage is itself restricted -- hardly the hallmark of an
absolute right.

My secondary point was that people who think that same-sex marriage should
be allowed are a small minority -- insulting everyone else is not going
to achieve your goals, regardless of how superior it makes you feel.

As for flaming:  I make it a point never to say anything on the net that
I wouldn't be willing to say in person.  

Bob Cormack