Quote:
Originally Posted by Idealogically Promiscuous
It's not discrimination if the restriction applies to everyone equally. It's simply a restriction you don't like. I'd like to not pay my taxes either, but it's not discrimination that I have to pay them.
That is true, but it's still not discrimination. Marriage also is not a "right" much like a driver's license is not a "right". If you want the restrictions changed, there is no reason not to advocate for that, but playing the discrimination card erroneous and, quite honestly, an egregious affront to circumstances of real discrimination. "Just because I want to do it" is not an argument that you are being discriminated against because you aren't allowed to do it.
Well if that is your only argument, it is nullified by the fact that reporting age does nothing for security either. It totally voids the assertion that homosexuals are being "profiled" in a discriminatory fashion any more than they are being "profiled" when we take a census.
|
Let me see if I get this right. You advocate that there is no discrimination in the marriage laws on the basis of orientation and gender. If that is the case, then why is it that couples of the same gender cannot get married? The law specifically excludes a whole segment of society while it continues to cater to heterosexual couples who marry for love. Because the laws specifically exclude an entire segment of society, they are indeed discriminatory. By using your logic, it would be fine to continue the poll tax and landowners only being able to vote.
As far as your argumentation regarding the collection of data, we have yet to establish any real cause to collect information on the sexual habits of individuals who chose to take a flight in this country. If there isn't a cause to take it, then why bother? Isn't it a frivolous use of resources to collect information that is not pertinent to security? Republicans should be outraged at the waste of federal dollars we have going on here.