Again, you equate child molesters and people who commit fraud with homosexuals.
That in and of itself makes you a bad person.
You do not like child molesters or people who abuse the welfare system. Ok, I respect that.
The respect is not mutual. I do not like gays and all of a sudden I am a bad person?
Bull crap.
You know exactly what I am referring to.
We all have certain things we do not like. But yet people throw rocks at me for not liking gays? Bull crap again.
You do not like child molesters or people who abuse the welfare system. Ok, I respect that.
The respect is not mutual. I do not like gays and all of a sudden I am a bad person?
Again, you equate child molesters and people who commit fraud with homosexuals.
In case you were wondering yes, posts like this make you a bad person.
I am pretty sure you do not like conservatives.
Does that make you a bad person?
You do not like child molesters or people who abuse the welfare system. Ok, I respect that.
The respect is not mutual. I do not like gays and all of a sudden I am a bad person?
No, I am not.
I do not dislike conservatives. I dislike bad people like yourself however.
I'm not opposed to people having their own prejudices; I'm opposed to people trying to use those prejudices to justify bad public policy when they can't form a single rational argument to justify that policy.
Ok, you're literally saying that disliking child molesters and fraudsters is the same as disliking homosexuals.
It's not.
I don't give a shit buddy. I couldn't care less. Clearly you're stuck on this whole involvement thing because you feel it's some talking point to support your argument for denying gays to marry.
You dislike anyone who disagrees with you.
No I am stuck on it because you insisted on claiming a falsehood to support same-sex marriage.
Basically if you don't understand the very basics of what marriage is, namely about having society/government involved in your life, perhaps you shouldn't be arguing about marriage?
Everyone has something they do not like.
How the fuck is government more involved in my life because I'm married or because a gay couple gets married?
How the fuck is government more involved in my life because I'm married or because a gay couple gets married?
No I am stuck on it because you insisted on claiming a falsehood to support same-sex marriage.
Basically if you don't understand the very basics of what marriage is, namely about having society/government involved in your life, perhaps you shouldn't be arguing about marriage?
How is the government not more involved in your relationship if you are married?
Try leaving your wife vs. gf and then tell me which relationship the government is more involved in
Nah, you're stuck on it because you can't actually come up with any real talking points based in the constitutional law.
All your remarks are just grasping at anything at which you think you can poke holes in, instead of coming up with actual case law, examples or any other legit factual based evidence that shows gay couples should not in any way shape or form be allowed the same marriage rights as hetero folks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._NelsonWith respect to the claim of an equal-protection violation, the Court found that childless marriages presented no more than a theoretical imperfection in the state's rationale for limiting marriage to different-sex couples. It found the plaintiffs' reliance on the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Loving v. Virginia, finding an anti-miscegenation law unconsititional, failed to provide a parallel: "in commonsense and in a constitutional sense, there is a clear distinction between a marital restriction based merely upon race and one based upon the fundamental difference in sex.
Some opinion article doesn't count. If you sight the disposition of a judge from a case in which a gay marriage ban was upheld, then I would listen. Otherwise, all your doing is just blabbing away and providing a weak argument full of opinion.
I am stuck on it because I believe that one of the fundamental reasons that same-sex marriage advocates support same-sex marriage is because they don't understand what marriage is.
I am stuck on it because I believe that one of the fundamental reasons that same-sex marriage advocates support same-sex marriage is because they don't understand what marriage is.
So pointing out an obvious failure of understanding pretty clearly advances that point.
Actual case law? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Nelson
There you go
I doubt you will listen to that either.
With respect to the claim of an equal-protection violation, the Court found that childless marriages presented no more than a theoretical imperfection in the state's rationale for limiting marriage to different-sex couples
I've been married for more than a decade. I think I have a better understanding of what it is than you do.
(Have you even been in a long term relationship, much less married?)
His arguments have devolved to "half the country and all the courts don't understand what marriage is but I swear I do". There's no point in even addressing something that childish and irrational.
I think at one point after a debate in which he argued that the police should be able to arrest women and forcibly abort their children he claimed to have a girlfriend. Let's just say that I'm... skeptical.
I am stuck on it because I believe that one of the fundamental reasons that same-sex marriage advocates support same-sex marriage is because they don't understand what marriage is.
So pointing out an obvious failure of understanding pretty clearly advances that point.
Actual case law? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baker_v._Nelson
There you go
I doubt you will listen to that either.
In May 2013, Minnesota legalized same-sex marriage and it took effect on August 1, 2013.
Section 3. Definition of marriage (ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court)In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.
Well - I'll have to ask my wife.Gay marry me? :wub:
Seriously though well said. Cuts right to the core of the issue that far too many seem to pass right over.
Well - I don't wanna support the little butter warmers if it doesn't work out . . .if you can get your toaster to consent, I don't believe there's anyone who'd stand in the way of your marriage.
I get your point, but HIS point is that government is neither more nor less involved in YOUR life if gays can marry each other. You are unaffected.How is the government not more involved in your relationship if you are married?
Try leaving your wife vs. gf and then tell me which relationship the government is more involved in
In fact, one can make an argument (admittedly weak) that government is potentially less involved in your life if gays can marry each other. How many people marry hetero, then later decide they prefer same sex? If same sex relationships bore no special societal stigma, surely some of these people would explore this before screwing up some unsuspecting hetero partner's life. Forcing square pegs into round holes doesn't damage just the peg, you know.
EDIT: As far as what is the proper definition of marriage, it's a societal institution; its definition is whatever society deems it to be at that particular moment in time. G-d's preferred definition is inherently unknown as there are several definitions, all purporting to represent G-d's will. But as we are by design a secular Christian nation, G-d's preferred definition is between each couple and G-d, NOT between G-d and government.