@BigFish Here in Canada, we had the long gun registry. It did nothing to reduce crime, but it did criminalize the innocent and yes, even lead to gun confiscation when an ignorant person had the power to redefine a specific rifle to make it illegal, based entirely on appearance!
@BigFish There are already background checks, so using that as justification for increased gun control is bogus. It's about 1) making it almost impossible to get guns through regulation and 2) control people who have guns. More in another post...
@BigFish Wow. Talk about argumentum ad absurdum! Opposing gun control is not that same as wanting some sort of free-for-all. There's nothing wrong with reasonable restrictions. I'm in Canada, where we were finally smart enough to get rid of our ludicrous long gun registry.
@nxnn People *can* be with whomever they want. The problem is, what they want is for the government to validate their sexual relationships, and force everyone else to do the same, through laws, regulations and intimidations.
(continued:) The state's role is diminished with natural marriage because of the assumption of paternity in procreation within natural marriage. Without that assumption, the state is forced to determine who is responsible for children, and define parenthood. Plus more, no room
@TrevDanic That was once my thought, but after researching *why* government is involved, I've changed my mind. Government recognition of natural marriage actually served to keep government *out* of our lives more. (to be continued...)
@mu Laws that dicriminated on the basis of sexual orientation *is* a from of discrimination. As it stands now, in the US, the law does not discriminate based on sexual orientation and is applied equally to all without discrimination. Pretty obvious and straightforward.
@mu Homosexuals have always had the right to marry. They just had to meet the same restrictions and qualifications as anyone else - that's equality under the law. By demanding those change, they are demaning the law discriminate on the basis if sexuality.
@mu Basic science is that the affect of CO2 is algorythmic. The more there is the less effect it has. There is also no connection between CO2 levels and historical temperatures. That's what the real data shows.
@mu "Creationism" is a very broad term (as is evolution). Many evolutionary biologists are also "creationists" because the recognise how impossible it is for inert chemicals > amino acids > living cell. That's an evidence based position.
Architecture is part of the problem. Public wash/change rooms are wide open. Even bathroom stalls can easily be seen into. A single user bathroom stall is no problem, but most public washrooms are designed very, very differently.
It's not just about restrooms, but change rooms too. Long before it was the "in" thing, these were "safe places" a woman could potentially escape to, to get away from men if she felt endangered. Now, stalkers can say they felt like a woman at that moment, and follow.