[mhss1992]

+1 to everything Squeek said.

Originally Posted by funmonkey54

But what I am asking is how you justify supporting one and not the other?

Well, if I didn't make it clear enough, here is what I believe: I am in favor of every relationship that is consensual between the people involved, as long as they have enough maturity to deal with this choice, and it doesn't harm anyone.

Originally Posted by funmonkey54

I am in fact against it. I believe that a line was drawn and really does not need to be changed. If homosexuals care to live together and do what they want within the bounds of the law, then they are fine. I do not agree with their choices but they are keeping it legal. This push to change the law to suit their lifestyle choices further is not necessary.

Their choices are based on what they like, and they didn't choose to like the same sex. You don't care about the line being changed simply because you're not gay. Why do straight couples deserve more benefits? Just because they are the majority?

Originally Posted by funmonkey54

And my arguments beyond this comparison include bringing in religion and would lead to a debate over how ethical morality in law is. I am avoiding those so as not to derail the thread any further than it already has gone.

So, in wraps, do I have more arguments? Yes, I do. But I believe this is the strongest argument, outside of bringing in religion/moral controversies/etc., and is fully valid.

I'd like to hear the "moral controversies" you're talking about. I could provide a lot of arguments against religion's view on this, but I will just say this: if people have the right to choose their religion and believe it's right, why do they think they have the right to deny the rights of people who didn't choose their sexual orientation?