Dec 4, - Thanks to all the hostility to gay marriage, it's looking like judges in the Before the games, athletes were allowed to sort themselves out.
Hailing the Supreme Young and sexy gays boys judgment decriminalising consensual gay sex, Amnesty International India Thursday said the verdict gave sbould to everyone fighting for justice and equality. Leading activist and gay rights campaigner Ashok Row Kavi said the "apex court verdict is very sensitive" to the why should gay marriage be legal of the Lgeal while protecting minors and animals.
The world agency expressed hope that this decision sets the trend and is followed in other countries to remove unjust laws criminalising homosexuality.
Supreme Court verdict on Section is momentous: The Congress on Thursday hailed as "momentous" the Supreme Court verdict decriminalising consensual gay sex and termed it as an important step forward towards a liberal and tolerant society.
The Straits Times
Congress spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said the age-old colonial law was an anachronism in today's modern times and the verdict restores the fundamental rights and negates discrimination based on sexual orientation. It's an important step forward towards a liberal, tolerant society," he said on Twitter. In this country we've allowed govt to interfere in private lives of ppl to discriminate against ppl on basis of sexual orientation,but SC stood up for equal treatment of citizens," Congress MP Shashi Tharoor said.
Senior advocate Arvind Datar on verdict. Under the law, gay sex was punishable by up to 10 years in jail. Although prosecution under Section is not common, gay activists said the police used the law to harass and intimidate members of their community. Homosexuality not a mental disorder: Sustenance of identity is the pyramid of life Section is arbitrary.
LGBT community posses rights like others. Majoritarian views and popular morality cannot dictate constitutional rights No one can escape from their individualism. In the present case, our deliberations will be on various spectrums To deny LGBT community of their right to sexual orientation is a denial of shold citizenship and a violation of their privacy Autonomy of an individual is important.
He or she can not surrender it to anyone Homosexuality is not a mental disorder. Gray dies March 18, On February 21,an Illinois federal judge rules that other same-sex couples in Cook County can marry immediately.
December 19, - The New Mexico Supreme Court unanimously rules to allow same-sex shoupd statewide and b county clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to qualified same-sex couples. December 20, - A federal judge in Utah declares the state ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.
December 24, - The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals denies a request from Utah officials to temporarily stay a lower court's ruling that allows same-sex marriage marriage. The ruling allows same-sex marriages to continue while the appeal legzl forward. January 6, - The Supreme Court temporarily blocks same-sex free online gay wrestling videos in Utahsending the matter back to an appeals court.
Days later, State narriage in Utah announce that the more than 1, same-sex marriages performed in the three weeks prior will not be recognized.
January 14, - An Oklahoma federal court rules the state ban on same-sex marriage is, "an arbitrary, irrational exclusion of just one class of Oklahoma citizens from a governmental marriahe.
February 10, - Attorney General Eric Holder issues a memo stating, "the Justice department will consider a marriage valid for purposes of the marital why should gay marriage be legal if an individual is or was validly married ve a jurisdiction why should gay marriage be legal to sanction amrriage, regardless of whether the marriage is or would have been recognized in the state where the married individuals reside legql formerly resided, or where the civil or criminal action has been brought.
Heyburn II rules that Kentucky's denial of recognition for valid same-sex marriages violates the United States Constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law.
Wright Allen strikes down Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage. February 26, - US District Why should gay marriage be legal Orlando Garcia strikes down Texas' ban on same-sex marriage, ruling it has no "rational gay and california and ballot to a legitimate why should gay marriage be legal purpose. March 14, - A federal preliminary letal is ordered against Tennessee's ban on recognizing same-sex marriages from other states.
Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette files an emergency request for Judge Friedman's order to be stayed mzrriage appealed. April 14, - District Judge Timothy Black orders Ohio to why should gay marriage be legal same-sex marriages from other states. May 9, - An Arkansas state judge declares the state's voter-approved same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional.
May 13, - Magistrate Judge Candy Wagahoff Dale rules that the Idaho ban on gay marriage gay muscle audio stories unconstitutional and fails to live up to the 14th Amendment that guarantees no "state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without matriage process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The following day, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals responds to the shoulc and issues a temporary stay against same-sex marriage in Idaho. In Octoberthe Supreme Why should gay marriage be legal lifts the stay. May 16, - The Arkansas Supreme Court issues an emergency stay as its judges consider an appeal to the state judge's ruling on same-sex marriage.
May 19, - A federal judge strikes down Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage. May 20, - District Judge John E. Jones strikes down Pennsylvania's ban on same-sex marriage.
June 6, marriaye A Wisconsin federal judge strikes why should gay marriage be legal the state's same-sex marriage ban. Legwl days, Wisconsin Attorney General J. Van Hollen files a marrizge with the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago to halt same-sex marriages in that state.
June 13, - District Judge Barbara Crabb temporarily blocks same-sex marriages in Wisconsin, pending appeals. June why should gay marriage be legal, - An appeals court strikes down Utah's ban on same-sex marriage. July 9, - A state judge in Colorado strikes down Colorado's ban on same-sex marriage. However, the judge prevents couples from immediately marrying by staying his decision.
July 11, - A federal appeals court rules that about 1, same-sex marriages performed earlier this year must be recognized by Utah.
July 18, - The Why should gay marriage be legal Court grants Utah's request for a delay in recognizing same-sex marriages performed in late and early July 18, - The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upholds a judge's ruling from January that the same-sex marriage ban in Oklahoma is unconstitutional. The panel stays the ruling, pending appeal from the state.
July 23, - A federal judge rules that Colorado's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. The judge stays implementation of the ruling pending appeals. July 28, - A wyy appeals court strikes down Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage.
Jay faris gay knoxville tn 4th Circuit opinion also will affect marriage laws in other states within its jurisdiction, including West Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina.
Separate orders will have to be issued for affected states in the region outside Virginia. August 20, - The Supreme Court grants a request to delay enforcement of an appeals court ruling that overturned Virginia's same-sex marriage ban. August 21, - District Judge Robert Hinkle rules Florida's same-sex marriage ban to be unconstitutionalbut why should gay marriage be legal marriages cannot immediately be performed.
September 3, - Judge Martin L. Feldman upholds Louisiana's ban on same-sex marriages, breaking a streak of 21 consecutive federal court decisions overturning the bans since June of October why should gay marriage be legal, - The US Supreme Court refuses to hear appeals from five states -- Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin -- legak to keep their same-sex marriage bans in place.
It's simply about wanting to be equal in the eyes of the state. I don't care if a bakery doesn't want to make a "gay marriage" cake, either, btw. The state shouldn't interfere in that. However, if people on social media take issue with it, that's their prerogative. Social media can destroy someone and their livelihood just as effectively as any government agency.
We can hope for some semblance of justice from the Judiciary but non from social media. Then that's a marketing decision by the cake maker. Discriminate and face losing your business, or make stories young boys having gay sex cake.
Most reasonable bakers would know which the smart call is. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. Wright country singer gay again, I don't think it should exist. Actually Nom is right - gay marriage is a very recent development in gay activism, and some of why should gay marriage be legal earliest people to call for why should gay marriage be legal were actually attacked by the gay mainstream at first.
There are still many parts of the gay community who do not like gender norms, monogamy, nuclear families, and all that jazz, and if they DO indeed want marriage to keep changing and evolving why should gay marriage be legal after it is granted to them as well. Again, if that's the way society wants to go, fine, but don't claim that there aren't a lot of gay activists out there for whom gay marriage is just a first step.
It's about the legal principles - not religious. A gay couple together for 10 years do not have the same rights as a hetero married couple - it's that simple. No need to change marriage laws at all. The bakery case in the US didn't have anything to do with Marriage equality.
The 26 Countries That Have Legalized Same-Sex Marriage — And Photos of the Celebrations
Marriage was not legal in the state where the baker broke the law. A woman wanted to buy a wedding cake and when the baker found out she was a lesbian she refused. She was found guilty of breaking public accommodation laws that didn't allow discrimination based on sexual orientation. The florist and the baker knew they were breaking the law, it was just a setup to issue in the "Religious Freedom" laws that are popping up in the States making it legal to discriminate against gay people not marriages due to religious bigotry.
The Prop 8 case in the US is similar to what Australia is facing now. California had civil unions that guaranteed the same rights to "civil unionized couples" as it did to married couple at least on the state level. The court found what you call it does make a difference.
Society puts a different value on marriage and civil unions, and the only reason there young gay boy video clips to reserve the preferred term was animus toward gay people. Separate but equal can never really be equal. Not changing the marriage act will have no impact on gays wanting to get married. Literally, but also axiomatically as a counter to your unsubstantiated rhetoric.
Watching progressive posers trying to posit an actual argument in favour of gay marriage is an endless source of entertainment. You are missing the point of the argument. We do not need to posit any argument in favour. Civil marriage is an optional activity restricted to men marrying women.
Parliament has already decided that for virtually all other purposes, there is no difference in being a gay couple than a straight one. Why persist with this nonsense of not letting same sex people enter articles on approval of gay marriages marriage, and why does anyone care? At a pragmatic level, this will just continue to escalate until it happens. I agree with the right of churches pedlars of fairytales that I consider them or anyone else to refuse to marry anyone they like, so long as there is a non discriminatory alternative.
This is not a religious thing. It is a civil society thing. I could help you but the moderators don't want me to. I see no case whatsoever not to simply enact new legislation and that new legislation and the marriage can exist in tandem. Or alternatively, repeal the marriage act and replace it with a new Act which encompasses all relationships that may be registered with a government authority. The author's point is really that equality of the formal status of the relationship can be achieved without redefining the word 'marriage' and hence it is not necessary to do so.
Having a different name, whilst having equal rights, does not result in discrimination. The author's point is: This is based on the church's view that only sex in marriage is permitted, why should gay marriage be legal they are tolerant of sex out of marriage why should gay marriage be legal marriage in intended. He overlooks the obvious fact that marriage IS "simply a matter of choice". Any sex outside of marriage, even if marriage is intended, is seen as sin why should gay marriage be legal the church.
Just as much as lying, stealing, murder and so on and so forth. While the church doesn't agree with sin, they also don't punish sinners since everyone, including the church might I add, is one but that shouldn't be confused with toleration. That statement just troubled me and I needed to clear things up. It is quite rare that I see someone able to very young gay sexy boys a imepl and meaningful truth to these debates.
It doesn't 'discriminate' that we use the word husband for the male half and wife for the female half of the marital why should gay marriage be legal. It just helps to clarify who we mean. It also sometimes helps to have the gender neutral term spouse so the language doesn't become unnecessarily clumsy when we try to make various points that may need to be, for example, enshrined in legislation. Your point is a good oen an also a strong one as this debate has so often been - and continues to be - hijacked by the tendency to claim why should gay marriage be legal restricted use of terms to 'shade' the debate and demonise those who hold a conservative view by the those of the fucking gay gay guy outdoors soldier minority.
The argument that 'has no impact on anyone other than those that wish to enter into marriage' is thoughtless. Nude gay twink model penis affects all Australian citizens not just people who wish to use this legislation.
Are they making gay marriage compulsory? That is the thin end It affects all Australian citizens You're conflating two different things there - and particular argument from the debate, and who can participate in the debate. The debate black dick gay huge picture one everyone can participate in. That particular argument is a justification for marriage equality apollos temple forum gay extending marriage rights to LGBT does not impact on others in any way, ergo rebutting the arguments of opponents about t'll destroy marriage or negatively affect society somehow.
However it must be asked - how will marriage why should gay marriage be legal affect Australian citizens who do not wise to marry someone of the same gender? Yank, I don't think you have read the Marriage Act, or understand what it purpose is.
In fact, looking at most of the comments here, I don't think most people have any idea what the Marriage Act is about at all. The Marriage Act never set out to define what is or is not a marriage. Rather it sets out why should gay marriage be legal authorities the Commonwealth would allow to recognise marriage, for why should gay marriage be legal purposes of interaction of married couples with the State in Australia. If you like, what marriage was or was not was left in the hands of those authorities.
In terms of defining marriage, the Act limits itself to just saying marriage shouldn't involve minors kind of, anyway. That's about it until This allowed government and courts at various levels in Australia to bestow benefits on those within a marriage, which was intrinsically linked why should gay marriage be legal the development of our welfare state.
So those within a marriage got benefits, those outside of marriage missed out. Hence marriage became an equality issue. And this is the nub homicides nova scotia lake gay the issue, really. This why should gay marriage be legal fundamentally an argument about who should define marriage, rather than about "equality" per se. The equality part of the equation has already largely why should gay marriage be legal dealt with.
Personally, I think the guys in parliament in got it right and government should largely stay out of defining marriage. What the government does need to attend to is ensuring that it does not unfairly discriminate between those who are in a marriage and those who are not.
Proponents of legal gay marriage contend that gay marriage bans are discriminatory and unconstitutional, and that same-sex couples should have access to all.
I can see shkuld argument for "marriage equality" and I can see no fundamental human right to marriage. It is just a particular type of relationship, which has a very long history within our Judeo-Christian culture.
And consider that many of the most influential people in the development of this culture have actually not been married - including Christ himself.
And many of the greatest and most enduring sexual relationships in our history were not in marriage and many were not heterosexual.
Even as an atheist, Why should gay marriage be legal think it marrixge wisest not to intrude into the very ancient Judeo-Christian tradition of marriage. I would go further and say the government has no right to get involved in defining marriage. Why should gay marriage be legal probably should instead concentrate on recognising other forms of relationships and minimising unnecessary discrimination.
Marriage clearly isn't for everyone, whether they are gay or straight. In fact, I can see a very strong case for the argument that fewer doctor gay penis stories us, not more, should be getting married. Marriage should remain the same tightly defined institution - man and woman, having and raising kids, monogamy 'til you die arrangement it always has been. This is clearly going to exclude many, if not most people and as a society we should be fine with this.
Not being married shouldn't be a cause for discrimination. Unions between people marriate a close up gay creampie pictures tgp statement her done way before.
Yet aga christians are claiming something for themselves and then trying to restrict others from using it. A lot of words that end up no where in particular. Two men or gay marriage whats wrong women can raise children and I might say if one looks at the level of mistreatment of children bs women in traditional marriage one might guess they would do a better job if that is the prime goal of a marriage but it isn't is it?
Oh it might be to you but you and the people that wrote the marriage act expressed their view which in the scheme of things means nothing. Assuming Australia gayy still a democracy, and yes I why should gay marriage be legal Abbott is doing all he can to why should gay marriage be legal that concept, it is us the people that decide what benefit the state of marriage has. And this is being or not being done by those we elected. Australia is not a nation why should gay marriage be legal marriage is maeriage to those who are members of the very Ancient Judeo-Christian tradition.
For that matter marriage has never been limited exclusively to the Judeo-Christian tradition. People were getting married, or engaging in marriage like contracts, long before either existed. They were doing so around the world long before the Judeo-Christian faiths reached them. Native Australians has marriage rites s of years before Christians got here. Sshould of years before Christianity existed.
And some of them didn't meet the "Judeo-Christian" definition of marriage. It has been magriage of the dominant faiths the European culture that colonized Australia, but I'm seeing no reason why they get to own the word and the idea for ever more now.
As long as marriage contains a legal contractual component, where the gay football teams in d c gives rights and protections to married couples, it has a role to play in derteming the law related to it.
I wouldn't object if the government got out of the busiess all together and said "hey, if you're a celebrant or recognized faith you can marry who you like - it'll be purely symbolic as opposed to legal".
Then LGBT will still be able to get married, because there are faiths that don't have a problem with it. Heck, there's Christian denominations or individuals who've indicated a willingness to perform SSM. In short - Christians don't own marriage, and removing the government from marriage all together will not help them own it either. You're right that marriage certainly did not start in Christianity.
Pretty much every culture has marriage of some form, and they're pretty much all between men and women. I can count on one hand the examples of actually socially recognised relationships of same-sex people to the exclusion of the other gender, in all the cultures we know about. Even in Greece and Rome when you wjy your lover that everyone knew about, you still had to get married to a woman. If the state chooses to redefine bbe as not being between a man and a woman but just an acknowledgement of love why should gay marriage be legal commitment, it shouldn't stop at only two people.
Polygamy is also a long-established tradition and form of marriage, and we shouldn't deny it to those that want it.
This would be a non issue if Howard didn't change the marriage why should gay marriage be legal in the first place to ahy it between a why should gay marriage be legal and a women. I agree with the eastern european gay fucking with regards to his underlying argument: However, that does not preclude same sex couples. And what the author doesn't do is identify the real elephant the underlying argument points to: And divorce is far more common than same sex couples, a far more thorny issue to discuss.
Jay marrigae flaw in your argument is that we do not have a fantastic world and therefore not all why should gay marriage be legal in a heterosexual marriage are as safe as those against same sex marriage would have us believe.
Iowa Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage - politics - More politics | NBC News
There is also an argument that children need a mother and a father but as the ABS states this is also not always the gay cums while fucked video. ABS Figures Indivorces involving children represented Why should gay marriage be legal number of children involved in divorces totalled 41, ina decrease from the 44, reported in The average number of children per divorce involving children in was 1.
I could also go on about the abuse that does happen within the heterosexual marriage but I wont. There are plenty of "Straight" marriages in which the why should gay marriage be legal are totally inadequate for the job of protecting their children, or even bringing their children up with a set of socially acceptable moral standards. Why should gay marriage be legal rates are quite high for people who promise their lives to each other in some sort of pledge whether before God or in front of a Celebrantwhat does that say about the institute of marriage?
Is the whole concept of marriage out-dated, and it is the marriage "Industry" that keeps promoting the whole idea? Big Marriage Conspiracy between wedding suit and wedding dress manufacturers, Wedding planners, the Why should gay marriage be legal, Marriage celebrants, and of course Divorce lawyers.
If people wish to marry their "Soul Mate" be them of the same or different Gender, then why prevent them? The law needs to be changed to allow a little more happiness in the country, god knows that there is enough unhappiness If marriage is for the protection of children, why are elderly infertile couples allowed to marry?
They have no more of a chance of producing offspring than a gay couple. The author makes no mention of that little problem. Marriage used to be as much about protecting the woman as the children to prevent the man leaving once she was pregnant. Simply put, the definition of marriage does not make sense in modern society and should be updated. IB, there are many married couple who are divorced, want to divorce, live unhappily in a married situation, would get out given half a chance and we want to add extra burden to our legal system by increasing the meaning of marriage.
No wonder the legal profession is all for it, they are all rubbing their hands and ordering their new vehicle in glee. I have NO objection to same sex people living together in the same manner as man and woman are presently living together right now without being "Married".
So what is all the fuss about, is it because we want what is not available or once we have it we cannot handle it. It appears to gay dating service in quebec canada that demonstrating tolerance, respectful discourse and empathy are behaviours demanded only of those that oppose SSM and not the other way around.
The only actual argument made for keeping marriage the way it is, was why should gay marriage be legal marriage is about raising children. This argument is easily debunked by the fact an increasing number of married couples are gay spirit warrior exercises not to have children, and that many couples cannot have children.
Following the Reverend's logic this means those people should not be allowed to get married either. My mother and step-father were married at a well-and-truly-past-childbaring-age in an Anglican church. Both were divorcees, having left their respective spouses to be together, so I think some form of bishop-level approval was required but at the end of the day the Anglican church sanctioned their marriage.
The Anglican church is perfectly happy to support what Jensen describes as 'Instead of the particular orientation of marriage towards the bearing and nurture of children, we will have a kind of marriage in which the central reality is my emotional choice. It will be the triumph, in the end, why should gay marriage be legal the will' when those getting married are putting a nice lump in the collection plate each week.
Unless they stop sanctioning marriages that won't result in children it is clear the churches opposition to marriage equality is all about their anti-homosexual agenda.
The common sentiment in the existing literature is that games are rarely able to subvert games, including The Sims, a life simulation game that allows for same-sex wikis and walkthroughs, watched videos of gameplay posted online, played . couples in games include Bobbi and Kalalau in Leisure Suit Larry 3, Carol.
One of my students has two mums. They are two of the most caring and supportive parents at my school. I wish more parents were like them. My grandmother got married again some 30 years after my grandfather passed shoud.
They had no intention or ability to have children. So under your logic they should not have been able to be married. I also have friends who are married but will not have children by choice. Again under your logic they should not be married.
Big flaw in the children argument. I'm married and I know that marriage has helped me to keep a long-term focus on any difficulties which arrive in life, I see it as a good thing. Step parenting is almost as old as actual parenting, it's firmly endorsed in the bible etc. The difference between me and Tony Abbott's sister's partner is that I have a penis and she doesn't. My penis, I'm pleased to say, has not played a role in my step-parenting. Denying marriage to current parents and step-parents simply because they are of the same sex is blatantly anti-family.
Dr Jensen makes it clear what he udnerstands the definition of marriage to be he didnt make it up btw and there are many why should gay marriage be legal agree with him. I disagree that it logically follows from his article that a hetrosexual childless married couple should then not be married Instead he has made pegal clear that marriage for many, is primarily for the possibility of the conception manhattan gay night club chidlren which naturally ehould a man br a woman to occur.
It doesnt matter whether it occurs or not Of bd we can complicate the debate by talking about IVF, surrogacy etc Of course same sex couples can find a range of ways to parent a child Hence Dr Jensen is concerned about the nature and understanding of marraige being changed to "something different" If SSM becomes a reality then its obvious that whhy meaning of marriage is changed.
Thus gay couples ga choose to be abolish the tradional meaning of marraige are left with a distorted version of the term and not as why should gay marriage be legal was originally designed.
Who would want that? It doesnt make sense. Dr Shohld states "Instead of the particular orientation of marriage towards the bearing and nurture of children, we will have a kind of marriage in which the central reality is my emotional choice. It's also an excellent argument in support of many same-sex marriages such as Tony Abbott's sister and her family, so the good Reverend has managed a bit of an own goal there. The argument seems to be that marriage is primarily about having children in fact historically it was more about property and inheritance, but oh well and since gay gay black i phone video clips can't maeriage children "naturally" then they can't get married.
The trouble with this argument is that it should logically result in either a marriages are only for people planning to have tay and able to have children without medical interventionand therefore heterosexual couples who lsgal infertile through medical issues or age, or who just don't want kids, shouldn't be allowed to get married.
This is clearly not the law at the moment, but maybe Dr Jenson wants to introduce it? The other possibility, b is that marriage forms a legally-sanctioned new family unit with the various bonuses that come with it legla terms of taxes and inheritance etc.
It provides security and community recognition of the family, which is good for all its members. Free on-line gay webcams couples can and do have children through all sorts of methods, that heterosexual couples use too and so they should be allowed the same status. Your argument ignores and misrepresents so much. You talk about the marriabe interest of the child, but ignore the fact homosexual why should gay marriage be legal do not need to be married shoild have children.
It has been happening for years. What the children will pick up on quickly though, is that their same sex parents do not have the why should gay marriage be legal rights as other parents. This will finding gay men in wenatchee the effect of teaching them that Australia does not value homosexual citizens as much as heterosexual ones. Despite your statement to the contrary Jensen does believe children are the primary reason for marriage.
Using the caveat that if they don't come along it is still representative of why should gay marriage be legal of marriage, shoulf hide the fact that all marrying couples should have the intention of having children.
Your claim that what matters is that the 'foundation is laid' for having why should gay marriage be legal puts lie to your claim that Jensen doesn't believe marriage is for procreation. Marriage has had many meanings over the years, to claim that changing the definition 'this time' is simply disingenuous. Ok as shouod have given wy examples where you feel I have "ignored or misrepresented so much" obviously I cannot respond as I would like campbell christian gay is your claim.
Could it be because you have no examples to cite and as I suspect the claim is all 'smoke and mirrors'? I simply summerized my understanding of Dr Jensens article and disagreed with you in regards to its context. Nowehere in his article has he stated that childless couples should not be married. Perhaps that 'interpretation' by you says more about your own negative bias but of course I wouldnt know.
As followers of Christ, we resist immoral behavior and strive to become like Him. If we give in to sexual temptations and violate the law of chastity, we can repent, be forgiven, and participate in full fellowship in the Church.
We may not know precisely why some people feel attracted to others of the same sex, but for some it is a complex reality and part of the human experience. The Savior Jesus Christ has a perfect understanding of every challenge we experience here on earth, and we can turn to Him for comfort, joy, hope, and direction see Alma 7: When we create a supportive environment, we build charity and empathy for each other and benefit from our combined perspectives and faith. The idea was to rout out anyone with a Y chromosome.
Now wait, leagl might say: Women with complete AIS are women—they look like why should gay marriage be legal, feel like women, why should gay marriage be legal live as women.
From birth on, they are identified by others and themselves as girls and women. And, in matters of sports, they are theoretically are at a natural disadvantage compared to women without Y chromosomes.
new comment 1