[XR1stang]

I just want to weigh in on one comment that was made in defense against gay marriage:


"However, I fail to see why expanding the ancient and time-tested legal definition of marriage to now include same-sex couples is going to do one thing to strengthen the institution of marriage"


Let us not forget that not too long ago that very same "time-tested legal definition of marriage" also precluded white folks marrying black folks, black folks marrying asian folks, and asian folks from marrying white folks. Also that same definition (but a little earlier in time) precluded people of different national origins from marrying each other, and let's not even bother to touch on the subject of arranged marriages. So personally I think that argument is full of more holes than swiss cheese.


Oh one other thing I wanted to touch on. Someone hinted at "looking at the flowers and animals" because they got it "right". I would like to point that poster to the fact that sea lions, sea gulls, grey wolves and numerous other animals have been known to have homosexual relationships. Heck, I could point you to the fact that your common domesticated dog will hump ANYTHING regardless of whether it's alive or inanimate, male or female, or even of a DIFFERENT species all together. There are also certain flowers that have been found to only propagate through the interaction of pollen from TWO female flowers of that species... oh, and what about all the androgynous/asexual species of animals/insects that are out there? Care to touch on that subject?