Changes

1,538 bytes added ,  19:54, August 8, 2007
New page: "it has the effect of elevating them above unmarried heterosexual couples" - In much of the United States a marriage license is required for heterosexual couples to have rights reserved fo...
"it has the effect of elevating them above unmarried heterosexual couples" - In much of the United States a marriage license is required for heterosexual couples to have rights reserved for marriage. Civil unions, in those states that him them and give the rights of marriage, obviously give preference to the homosexual unmarried state over the heterosexual one. This is not a comment about the "rightness" or "wrongness" of that position, only that it exists. I seem to recall reading in Massachusetts that IBM was mulling over what to do with their medical coverage policies since they used to allow homosexual employees the right to carry a partner just like married couples, but now that marriage was allowed in the state for homosexuals, would they continue to give this preferrential accommodation to homosexuals that heterosexuals could not have short of marriage?

I also hope you are using fact citations for the good of Conservapedia. If you feel an entry is in error because you have knowledge that would go contrary to what is written, then a fact citation or, better yet, a discussion in talk is appropriate. If you merely want to see a reference, then a fact citation is counter productive to article readability for those students who use this site as a source for their work or just their common reading.

You may also wish to consider article improvement by adding information or sources or possible rewording in areas where it is not clear. Thanks. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 15:54, 8 August 2007 (EDT)
nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
13,818

edits