"3 or more women was probably more brothel related."
Definitely. However, couldn't one also argue that legislation prohibiting gays from marrying is more morality related than a discrimination issue?
The above is definitely NOT my view on the subject, just making a point on just how flexible definitions can be.
In both cases, public morality is used as an alter-ego for discrimination.
As long as marriage exists, then I'm for gay marriage, but in point of fact, I don't think ANY MARRIAGE should be recognized by the government at all -- it's a vestige of the last century, when you had a division of labor where one stayed home and the other worked. The world has changed tremendously since then.
Marriage should be a religious institution only, in the same way as being born-again or confirmed or going through a bar mitzvah (i.e. you get nuttin from the gubmint just cuz you were born again). Everyone should have to file individual taxes, etc. regardless of whether you have a ring on your finger or not.
Re: What about...
Definitely. However, couldn't one also argue that legislation prohibiting gays from marrying is more morality related than a discrimination issue?
The above is definitely NOT my view on the subject, just making a point on just how flexible definitions can be.
In both cases, public morality is used as an alter-ego for discrimination.
As long as marriage exists, then I'm for gay marriage, but in point of fact, I don't think ANY MARRIAGE should be recognized by the government at all -- it's a vestige of the last century, when you had a division of labor where one stayed home and the other worked. The world has changed tremendously since then.
Marriage should be a religious institution only, in the same way as being born-again or confirmed or going through a bar mitzvah (i.e. you get nuttin from the gubmint just cuz you were born again). Everyone should have to file individual taxes, etc. regardless of whether you have a ring on your finger or not.