[extropy-chat] Gay Marriage

[Kevin Freels]

Yeah, it's neat how that works. It's the same with many Libertarians. You
get some agreement on both ends, dems and repubs.  I don't agree with Bush
on a lot of things, but we agree on a few things as well.
I forget if it was Amara or Olga, but someone was trying to understand how
and Extropian could vote for Bush and this is the reason. Those things that
I disagree with Bush on, are largely out of his control. He may be against
gay marriage, but I don;t see him dealing with the issue over the next 4
years. He may invoke God in his rhetoric, but Kerry does as well. I support
stem cell research, but not the government funding of it - and I don;t see
where he will be signing anything into law banning it in the next 4 years.

Then there is the terrorism issue. The whole 9/11 thing started it's
planning stages during the Clinton administration, so you can;'t say it is
Bush's policies that cause this. Heck, remember the Iran hostages during the
Carter admin? I think the terrorism issue is the single most important issue
out there right now. Everything else is on th eback burner. I don;t see
anything else major happening over the next 4 years, and I don;t expect any
silly flag-burning amendments, anti-gay legislation, etc to be happening.

So the only question I am concerned with right now as far as president is
the terrorism issue. The question is whether we attack these bastards where
they are, or if we sit and wait until they attack us here. As far as I know,
Kerry supported the Bush stance until he ran for president. That's when he
became the anti-war president. I assure you that I am anti-war, but you
can;t just bury your head in the sand and pretend that these bastards are
not out there wantingus to die. Nor can you prpetend you are anti-war when
you really only changed your stance to get elected. One of my favorite lines
from this campaign was Kerry when asked why he had talked of supporting the
additional $85 billion to get flak jackets and other supplies for the troops
yet voted against it, he responded "I voted for the $85 billion before I
voted against it". Now what does that mean?

No matter how anti-war you are, these bastards will gladly cut your head off
and make a video of it. They hate me because I am American, and they hated
me a long time before Bush and would continue trying to kill me if Kerry
were elected. There is a right way to accomplish your goals and a wring way.
The terrorists running around the world are doing it the wrong way. They are
not doing it in an extropian way, so you can't oppose them in an extropian
way. They have chosen a violent path, so we have no choice but to either bow
down to them, or fight their way.

I am truly sorry for those individuals that have died in Iraq, but it would
have all been avoided if Saddam had simply went along with the UN
resolutions and opened up as required by the inspectors. This was not a
violation of his soverighnty either. He ruined that when he chose to attack
Kuwait. Saddam acted like a criminal. He acted like he had WMDs. If he
didn;t have them, which is still debateable, he sure went out of his way to
act like he did have them.

And if you remember, Kerry supported all of this until he became the
anti-Bush president.

I figure most opposition to Bush on this list is in regards to Bush's stance
on the war, and on religious issues such as stem-cell research, gay marriage
and abortion. If nothing will happen in the next 4 years on those issues,
and if Kerry is really pro-war and lying about it, and Bush gives tax breaks
to large corporation who just happen to be the same people we need to invest
in new technologies, then how could someone vote for Kerry?

I hope this helps those who really want to understand my POV. If someone is
looking for a huge debate, IO won;t take the bait. I just know the question
was asked here by someone who seemed to really want to understand, so I
thought I would try to explain it in the few minutes I had.....Now it's time
to go do that American thing.....shopping :-)

Kevin Freels


----- Original Message ----- 
From: ""Hal Finney"" <hal at finney.org>
To: <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 1:06 AM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Gay Marriage


> Saw an interesting posting today on www.dailykos.com, a well known left
> wing blog, endorsing the same idea that Mike Lorrey and Kevin Freels have
> been discussing, of getting the government out of the marriage business
> and letting it be a church matter.
>
> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/5/123023/403
>
> Kos quotes, "Marriage should be a faith-based institution and we should
> turn it over to the churches. If someone doesn't want to be married
> in a church, then the Federal government can offer them a legal civil
> contract (this is a better name for it than civil union)... The Federal
> government could offer gays the same civil contract status as it offers
> straight people who want to shack up legally but without the sanction
> of a church," and adds, "Simple, and common sensical."
>
> I doubt that Mike Lorrey and Kos agree on much, but it's interesting
> that on at least this point they are on the same wavelength.
>
> Hal
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat