On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Bill Putney wrote:

> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Bill Putney wrote:

> >>And to the guy who wants to marry his sister, or his dog, or a tree, or
> >>a rock - what do you tell him?

> > You tell him, Bill, that his dog, his tree or his rock is not sentient and
> > is therefore unable to give consent, and that family members are
> > prohibited from intermarrying for medical reasons.

> Well if the medical thing was used in the past to prevent racially mixed
> marriage, then, by liberal logic, "medical reasons" can never be used
> for denail of alleged rights in any "rights" issue in the future,
> because we all know that if a = b, then d = f (by liberal logic).

The above paragraph consists of you railing against something that has not
been argued -- at least you've not provided a cite for any such an
argument. It seems to be something you're afraid might be argued.

> Oh, but Daniel - he disagrees with you about the sentient part,

Your comparison of homosexual people to dogs, trees and rocks is noted.