This picks up on a post below about Senator Kathleen Sgambati who supports the civil union bill that recently passed the House because "she can’t support ‘discrimination against any group.’" The Senator obviously is just repeating the Democrat "soundbite" on civil unions.
If the standard is no "discrimination against any group," then how can the Senator support the smoking ban? After all that discriminates against people who like to, or for all we know may be genetically predisposed to, smoke. The Senator would also have to oppose speed limits because that discriminates against people who like to, or for all we know may be genetically predisposed to, drive fast. And let’s not forget the Interest and Dividends tax. That discriminates against people who like to, or for all we know may be genetically predisposed to, save and invest.
With reference to marriage, how can the Senator support prohibiting parents and adult children to marry, if the standard to be applied is "no discrimination against any group"? How can she support restricting marriage to only two persons? How can she support marriage being for life, when that discriminates against folks who may like to, or for all we know may be genetically predisposed to, marry for shorter durations?
What the Senator really means is that she doesn’t support discrimination against any group that she doesn’t think should be discriminated against. Which simply begs the question why does the Senator believe that gays and lesbians should not be discriminated against where marriage is involved.
