From: lorad474{at}cs.com

On Mar 19, 6:41 pm, rfisc...{at}sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>   wrote:
> > rfisc...{at}sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> >>   wrote:
> >> > "RamRod Sword of Baal" 
> >> >> "Sound of Trumpet"
 wrote in
> >> >> >Permitting legal unions apart from marriage
injures young people by
> >> >> >"placing them in a situation that does not
give security, that does
> >> >> >not give stability or serenity."
>
> >> >> Here in Australia de facto relationships are protected by law.
>
> >> >> There is no reason why this cannot be done in other
countries, if it
has not
> >> >> already been done.
>
> >> >For the simple reason that the people do not want it.
>
> >> According to you.
>
> >No... not "according to me".. But according to the many
countries that
> >do not permit it.
>
> Many countries permit polygamy and do not permit Christianity.

And many do not permit polygamy and do permit Christianity.. Your point was?

> So what?  That has little to do with the here.

That's what I asked.. 'So what?'

> >> >>  How does Gay or de facto relationships, if
legalized weaken the
current
> >> >> marriage set up?
>
> >> >Such a comparison attempts to equate two entirely
different societal
> >> >units.
>
> >> That isn't an answer to the question.
>
> And still no answer.

Of course there is. I answered at least three times previously. Here's another:
Anyone attempting to equate 'gay marriage' to traditional marriage must
fail in the attempt for the simple reason that barren relationships cannot
and should not be equated to child producing marriages.

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag