Re: False Issue

mark goldberg wrote:
> Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
>
> > mark goldberg wrote:
> >  > Josh Rosenbluth wrote:
> >  >
> >  >>
> >  >> As I said before, it is gender discrimination.  Just like banning
> >  >> inter-racial marriage is racial discrimination.
> >  >
> >  > No... you picking nits, not describing what the purpose of the law
> >  > was and has been. There are possibilities for amendments to state
> >  > laws, but they are not the marriage law.
> >  > here's an article by a prof. of law that has some ideas...
> >
> > The professor does not dispute that banning same-sex marriage is 
> > discrimination.  He just believes such discrimination is both a good 
> > idea and passes legal muster.  He may or may not be correct about 
> > that.  But, in either case, it is still discrimination.
>
> Your a 4th degree black belt in nitpickery.
> but it doesn't mean much, because it doesn't stand for much.
> You make a decent pedant though.

Apparently, you missed my point when I first replied to a post. 
Somebody here claimed that if we ban same-sex marriages, people will 
have equal rights.  Of course, there would not be equal rights (whether 
or not there should be equal rights is a separate issue).  People who 
think same-sex marriages should be banned should not pretend to support 
equal rights, and instead should admit they don't want equal rights.

My reply to you above, in that context, is not nitpicking.

Josh Rosenbluth