response 285 of 293:

Dec 22 17:35 UTC 2003

  re #284:

  >  There aren't any current Amendments that *take rights away*.

  Not currently, no.  But of course the reason you needed to add
  that qualification is because of Prohibition, which should serve
  as a reminder to all of us that even the substantial barriers
  we have in place are no guarantee that poorly thought-out
  amendments won't make it into the Constitution.

response 287 of 293:

Dec 22 20:10 UTC 2003

I sure hope that if we do end up with an ammendment prohibiting gay marriage,
that we do not end up with organized crime smuggling in homosexuals from
across the border...

response 289 of 293:

Dec 22 22:01 UTC 2003

  Watch me make bru's head spin..

  re #287:  that's right!  with benefits costs so much lower
  (because they're not allowed to have legally-recognized spouses
  or in many places to adopt children) employers will have a strong
  incentive to employ lower-cost homosexual workers and as a believer
  in unregulated market forces, you'll have to support their decision!

response 291 of 293:

Dec 22 22:09 UTC 2003

(I'd think you'd _want_ to get rid of some Tories, twenex. ;)

response 293 of 293:

Dec 22 22:30 UTC 2003

(I know.)