Comments on: “Gay marriage: Where to now?” Glen Lavy of ADF v. Jon W. Davidson of Lambda Legal http://www.alliancealert.org/2008/05/19/gay-marriage-where-to-now-glen-lavy-of-adf-v-jon-w-davidson-of-lambda-legal/ news from the frontlines of the culture war Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:37:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: David Crowe http://www.alliancealert.org/2008/05/19/gay-marriage-where-to-now-glen-lavy-of-adf-v-jon-w-davidson-of-lambda-legal/#comment-7787 David Crowe Tue, 20 May 2008 00:58:33 +0000 http://www.alliancealert.org/?p=3743#comment-7787 This is Davidson's argument: "we believe voters will agree that none of our sisters or brothers should be excluded from equality under the law. All gay people are asking for is that others follow the Golden Rule and treat us as they would like to be treated -- as full members of society who are provided the same right to marry the person they love, just as everyone else is treated." Where does this 'equality' business stop? If you follow Davidson's reasoning, which by the way, is not the Golden Rule, polygamists, polymorists, old guys with young girls, etc. should all be granted 'rights' simply because they should have an equal right along with the gay community. The reasoning does not take into account the rights (what rights) of children, but only what one group 'wants.' A 'want' is not a right. David This is Davidson’s argument: “we believe voters will agree that none of our sisters or brothers should be excluded from equality under the law. All gay people are asking for is that others follow the Golden Rule and treat us as they would like to be treated — as full members of society who are provided the same right to marry the person they love, just as everyone else is treated.”

Where does this ‘equality’ business stop? If you follow Davidson’s reasoning, which by the way, is not the Golden Rule, polygamists, polymorists, old guys with young girls, etc. should all be granted ‘rights’ simply because they should have an equal right along with the gay community. The reasoning does not take into account the rights (what rights) of children, but only what one group ‘wants.’ A ‘want’ is not a right.

David

]]>