2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

For Maggie, I would ask the following:

Let's assume that discrimination by restricting marriage in the past has been closely related to raising children and the function of society imposing roles and duties on those married parents.

It seems to me that the discrimination must be continually justified because society changes. So, now that folks can divorce, people can use birth control, and children out of wedlock is no longer stigmatized, what's the justification right now?

posted 2 years, 5 months ago
view in context