[Vision2020] Re: David Horowitz [A gift to Ed] Was: A sad dayin IDAHO

[g. crabtree]

The problems I was referring to were once we reached the polygamy stage. If the matter ended at same sex union I would probably be OK with it (as much as I can be in light of my general objections to any state involvement), but I see no difference between (and equal validity for) the arguments for either form of non-traditional union and that way lies trouble. Sorry I was unclear. Please don't misunderstand my position. I do not hold gay folk in any kind of contempt. The precious few that I know (in person at least) are pleasant people for whom I wish only the best. I simply don't believe that this issue would result in anything good for our country and no benefits for the gay community that can't be achieved by other means.

gc
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Scott Dredge 
  To: g. crabtree 
  Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com 
  Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 2:26 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Re: David Horowitz [A gift to Ed] Was: A sad dayin IDAHO


  "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:

  "My objections stem from problems that I see when it comes to insurance, social security, inheritance, and child custody along with a host of other issues. Same gender marriage will cause far more problems then it will solve."

  Gary,

  What specific problems do you see when insurance, social security, etc. are applied to a relationship between two men (or two women) that are not problems when applied to a relationship between a man and a woman?

  -Scott


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060518/8552f253/attachment.htm