Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers)

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
   "C. E. White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Lloyd Parker wrote:
>
>> So are conservatives -- telling people what kind of sex to have, what 
genders
>> can marry, what a woman can do with her body, etc.
>
>It is not just conservatives who oppose the redefinition of "marriage."
>Any reasonable person should oppose this sort of reckless redefinition
>of a long established legal / social / religious institution. If same
>sex couples want to form a long term commitment to each other, I think
>that is fine. If they feel they need a governmental sanction to this
>commitment, then pass a law that creates a new class of civil union. But
>trying to call this a "marriage" is an insult to millions of American
>and serves no useful purpose.
>

But why should government institutionalize discrimination?  OK, no religion 
should be required to perform or recognize a marriage not in keeping with its 
creed (doesn't the catholic church not recognize marriages by divorced 
people?), but why should government discriminate?

>Ed