A Straight View Of Gay Marriage

Commonly heard: Gay marriage isn't mentioned in the constitution. The constitution doesn't speak of slaves. Was it "convenient" to fight a four year war for the nonconstitutional right to free persons from bondage, which many legally opposed? It adds to the public expense. Women didn't have the right to vote in the constitution. Should the government bear the costs of registering women, maintaining their names on the rolls, and other expenses associated with half the voters now being women--who determined the November election?

A Straight View Of Gay Marriage

Or in the terms cited: is it fair for women to pay and be taxed in a system that did not allow their vote? Is it fair for lgbt individuals to support through their taxes the rights of others--and met the expenses of health care and other services--when they are excluded? Is it fair for them to pay for the same coverage, pay the same taxes and face decisions they want made by life partners (not sleep partners!) and be denied that option? Isn't that the essence of discrimination, bias, and inequality? They don't get a free ride on us; we get a free ride on them! Remarkably, these comments are exactly like letters written during the Civil War, by Union soldiers. They supported freedom for slaves--as long as they didn't have to pay for schools, complete for jobs, or grant them the right to vote, which Gen, Sherman pointed out, those free didn't have in Northern states. It's time to end discrimination. If we are a truly free society, we share in the rights of liberty and freedom. It shouldn't matter who you love.

Double Elephants Mobile Publishing Great Content and Design for Your Mobile Device