I understand that this post is pretty long and has a lot of words. To take all in to acount would be very hard.
when i say gay i mean homosexual, so gay and lesbian (gay is a shorter word and im lazy)
(as previously stated)
While I do MORALY oppose gay (men and woman) and polygamist marrige I have tried to go out of my way to NOT use this as reasoning of anysort, I have never said in this post that I oppose gay unions SOULY becasue i belive it is wrong, I try not to legislate religion in this thread.
MY question i would like a straight (no pun intended) awnser on is why
-polygamists shouldn't get unions (under that law)
-but why homosexuals should (under the law)
Why under your deinition (redcar) of equality for gays
-being able to have unions
WHy don't polygamist get equality, you really can't expect others to support you if you wont support other people. please tell me exactly where im wrong.
as previously stated by redcar
SO would you vote to make gay unions a possibility but polygamyh not a possibility?
in a word, yes.