I see what you mean, Exquisite. No, this is not a moral issue, but when I mean discriminated, I mean in any way shape or form in an institutional manner. For instance, traveling from one state where gay marriage was allowed (like in Massachusetts) to a state such as Michigan, where there is a same sex marriage ban, that same sex marriage isn't recognized. Discrimination in the way that when a homesexual's spouse is hospitialized, they are not entitled to see them, as would a heterosexual mate. I could go on and on, but do you see my point?
Additionally, isn't the spirit of "seperate but equal" supposed to be pervasive? Aside from the education systems, seperation was manifested in different ways, like bathrooms, water fountains, places where you could sit on a bus and so forth. But back to the original question, how is it not making homesexuals 2nd class citizens when they aren't granted the same rights as heterosexuals? If homosexuality is a choice (I'm not saying it is or isn't), whose decision is it to decide whether or one is not entitled to the same rights because of their personal choice? I suppose I was (and still am) having a hard time being on both sides of the fence (saying civil unions are fine, but marriages between those of the same sex aren't). Like the who sanctity of marriage thing---it's a personal choice. Plenty of people ignore the sanctity of marriage by tarnishing it's traditional definition. Why can't homosexuals have that same right? And I ask this from a legal standpoint, not moral.
enigma_AKA
ETA-Just as I asked someone before to provide some precedents/discussions, etc. for their argument, whether it be for or against, that's what I meant by responding via PM. And I agree, bathrooms SHOULD be seperate, but that's another discussion...
Hybrid Mode
