Sometimes I really don't know if it should be admired or pitied when people talking something that they absolutly have no idea what exatly it is about.
Sometimes I really don't know if it should be admired or pitied when people talking something that they absolutly have no idea what exatly it is about. We are talking about the word "marriage" here, which is a legal term. It is a common sense that anything requires a law to protect or define is political issue. Gay marriage is not about sex or moral believes. It is about some people's right. You don't need to agree with gay's life style, and you do not need to be friend with them, but you can not say they do not deserve to have the same political right that you do. Just like the issue of abortion, which is also about the right for women to chose, and is not about reproduction unless you believe a woman has to be reproduction machine to be a woman. In US we say "Constituion gives people the right to be stupid". Then what's wrong to say "Constitution gives people the right to be gay"? If gay's right is protected by constitution, which it is, by the law of equal protection, then how do you argue that gays do not have the same right like you do? Like marriage, in this case. Chinese used to have no right to bring their spouse to the States, defined by "Chinese Exclusives", which is law. One reason is simple, that "Their lifestyle is different from us". People criticize 呂 is because of what she did is simply spreading hate, not about the right that she speaks. There is a reason that the law has a term "hate crim".
