News Newsletter >> Pills, Compare pills, Reviews pills auto-moto Adipex online Tramadol online Top casino Free Ringtones Necklace Blog Search the Web Top auto-moto Free Ringtones Ladies handbag Trousers Boots Intimate goods Tunings Medical tests Building materials Green Card Information Yachts Autos Fashions Sale Auto Medicine news Cigarette Cheap pharmacy shop Credits Rington Cases Hydrocodone online Free mp3 ringtones FDA Approved Pharmacy Vicodin online Soma online Suits Phentermine online Best Ringtones ya.by Chronometer Ornaments furniture Replica Rolex Cars Bracelets Download Ringtones mp3 music for mobile Mobiles Credit Valium online Underwear Fioricet online Rolex Replica Balans

Archive for August, 2007

Response to Thomas Sowell

Tuesday, August 28th, 2007

Response to Thomas Sowell article

Now that a number of state courts have refused to redefine marriage to include same-sex unions, cries of “discrimination” are being heard.

The “equal protection of the laws” provided by the Constitution of the United States applies to people, not actions. Laws exist precisely in order to discriminate between different kinds of actions.

When the law permits automobiles to drive on highways but forbids bicycles from doing the same, that is not discrimination against people. A cyclist who gets off his bicycle and gets into a car can drive on the highway just like anyone else.

Mr. Sowell, there are good, safety-related reasons for banning bicycles from highways - reasons that do not apply to gay marriage. In a free society, laws that discriminate without good reason should be overturned - even those that discriminate against actions.

In a free society, vast numbers of things are neither forbidden nor facilitated. They are considered to be none of the law’s business.

Sounds a lot like something that should apply to marital choices among consenting adults.

Homosexuals were on their strongest ground when they said that the law had no business interfering with relations between consenting adults. Now they want the law to put a seal of approval on their behavior. But no one is entitled to anyone else’s approval.

Good. Then you apparently understand that (more…)

Marriage Amendment

Sunday, August 12th, 2007

Response to David K. Bernard article

Bernard: Why Texans should not support homosexual marriage

God created one man and one woman to inhabit the Garden of Eden, and He created them as companions who were suitable for each other. We must uphold that ideal for marriage today, but how should we do so in modern society?

You should do so in a manner that includes peaceful coexistence with those who would make different choices for themselves. In a free society, upholding your own “ideal for marriage” should not equate to getting laws passed to restrict the options of anyone who prefers a different ideal.

Let us briefly consider the biblical teaching on this subject.

Let’s not. We’re talking about rules that everyone must live by. Biblical assertions have no place in such a discussion. If a strong case cannot be made for something independently of what the Bible has to say about it, (more…)