http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_11868643
So it was proven in CA that even upgrading a homosexual to a "suspect" class of person (why exactly the phrase suspect is used makes no sense to me) rights can be voted away because they are not significant enough of a human to warrent full protection of "fundimental" rights (that ironically were already given out). What other rights that are not "fundimental" can be so easily removed?
Now the feds aren't accepting relationships of a homosexual nature. Apparently they aren't real or aren't worth counting. That would give visibility and validity Apparently those "marriages" in Mass and CT are just for show and don't really count. Actually for the census, they don't.
So relationships exercising the whole purpose of "same-sex attraction", the definition of homosexuality, are not recognized and rights can be taken away from that pairing seemingly on a whim.
So it was proven in CA that even upgrading a homosexual to a "suspect" class of person (why exactly the phrase suspect is used makes no sense to me) rights can be voted away because they are not significant enough of a human to warrent full protection of "fundimental" rights (that ironically were already given out). What other rights that are not "fundimental" can be so easily removed?
Now the feds aren't accepting relationships of a homosexual nature. Apparently they aren't real or aren't worth counting. That would give visibility and validity Apparently those "marriages" in Mass and CT are just for show and don't really count. Actually for the census, they don't.
So relationships exercising the whole purpose of "same-sex attraction", the definition of homosexuality, are not recognized and rights can be taken away from that pairing seemingly on a whim.