in point of fact

[rm]

When you say something anti-gay and I point out the bigotry of your statement, I'm not the one being hateful.

Comments

Re: and here we have the crux of the issue

[fabricdragon.livejournal.com]

if you try to take the battle to changing people's religious beliefs, you automatically make a lot fo moderates into radicals..

no, no one wants to "encourage" prejudice.... but you can LEGISLATE civil behavior, not religious beliefs. thank Gd.

Re: and here we have the crux of the issue

[effervescent.livejournal.com]

Well, that was mostly an aside.

But - really - I get the idea and what it's based on, and the virtue of it. But I don't think it would -work-.

Also, upon review of what they did here in Canada:

The Canadian Parliament approved the granting and recognition of same-sex marriages by defining marriage as “the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others” in July 2005 (<a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Canada">Wiki</a>) You can redefine the word, rather than switching to a different term. And it's my belief that this is what should occur. Introducing a new term only complicates things.