South Africa's high court approves gay marriage - Page 8

tw · 11-30-2006, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint

That's a long-winded version of "if we allow gays, what's next, bestiality?" etc. ad nauseum...

I don't see that in 9th's post. Admirable is his ideal that one must be so careful so as to never make a mistake. However, blindly sticking to a mistake, no matter what, is also called .... Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld is indeed a wonderfully smart man. Intelligence that is lost, useless, so destructive, and classic anti-American only because Rumsfeld also was not smart enough to admit and was so emotionally attached to his mistakes. There is nothing admirable in that mindset that even justified the holocaust and killing fields.

But again, none of this explains how gay marriage adversely affects anyone. It only says, "I was wrong but my principles will not allow me to ever be right." With Rumsfeld, that was a prescription to justify mass murder.

Principle is also characteristic of one who believes he is the new messiah. Does that personal (religous) belief justify hate of gay marriage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

I believe that I must behave in accordence with the current state of the system, ...

IOW stifling innovation is good? America's greatest secret for success is about change, innovation, and therefore the advancement of mankind. An engineer would never be so anti-American. And yet that is 9th's stated principles. Meanwhile, that principle does not prove that gay marriage adversely affects anyone.

9th Engineer's post reminds me of Eisenhower who knew he was wrong and would have to lie to an embarrassing question. Ike’s press conference answer made same sense as 9th Engineer's post so that the press would not dare ask any more questions. Ike's answer was a ‘total nonsense’ classic. So is 9th Engineer's reply.

Sorry 9th. I am not buying it. Like Eisenhower, you have not explained anything. Posting gobbledygook does not explain why gay marriage affects you.

So do you really believe you are the new messiah?

Either way, still unanswered is how gay marriage adversely affects anyone. Why no answer? When we have eliminated all other possibilities, the valid answer is one that remains. Apparently gay marriage only hurts emotions of those who hate gays. Why is that the only answer? Because still intentionally unanswered: how does gay marriage harm anyone. Gay marriage should be banned only because it is a classic example of being American – because it is socially innovative? Such innovation only hurts emotions of those who hate.

Clearly gay marriage harms no one. Clearly banning of gay marriage does harm some. Clearly this issue would be totally irrelevant if others did not so hate - gays and social innovation. Amazing how some so hate things that made America great. So we have an answer based in gobbledygook. Turkeys live!

Flint · 11-30-2006, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw

I don't see that in 9th's post.

Really? He said we can't allow gay marriage because we'd have to allow everything else, and I pointed out that this is a well-worn "talking point" against gay marriage. I'm not sure if you read his post, because if you did I don't understand what you "don't see" in it. I'm absolutely sure he didn't say anything about Rumsfled, so I think you may be confused about which thread you're in. This is the gay marriage thread.

Aliantha · 11-29-2006, 11:14 PM

Why can't you make one decision for the sake of that particular decision then worry about the next one when it happens?

It seems to me you're more worried about who else besides gay people might be able to lay claim to the right to marry.

From my perspective, I support gay marriage. I'm not sure what i think about polygamous marriages and so don't really have a point of view on that as yet other than that if all parties love each other then it would seem fair.

Do you see the reasoning. One thing at a time. Might make life easier for yourself.

bluecuracao · 11-29-2006, 11:53 PM

9th, you obviously recognize the legitimate point of view regarding gay marriage, but you're lumping it in with a bunch of other crap. Take a breather to separate the issues, and it will make more sense.

Ibby · 11-30-2006, 08:35 AM

However, if you remove love from the equasion as 9th advocates, you DONT HAVE TO allow anything else... because, as I stated, saying someone can or can't do something based simply on their gender, for ANY reason, is sexism, and on as issue as important as marriage then it is completely, utterly unacceptable.

That's not even in the same ballpark as allowing polygamy, bestiality, or anything else at all.

xoxoxoBruce · 11-30-2006, 09:00 AM

Quote:

because, as I stated, saying someone can or can't do something based simply on their gender, for ANY reason, is sexism,...

So you think you should be allowed to use the ladies room?
Marriage, and who can and can't, is not simple. It's not a right, it's a privilege granted by the government, that carries rights, benefits and liabilities. Like any privilege the government grants, they establish what the rules are and that is never simple. That's why there is a debate.

Clodfobble · 11-30-2006, 11:29 AM

I've often seen a distinction being made nowadays, at least in written form, between "gay" (homosexual) and "ghey" (teh suxxors).

11-30-2006, 12:06 PM

You did not answer. You have never stated, specifically, how gays getting married will affect you personally.

It is an easy question. What is the problem?

11-30-2006, 12:14 PM

Your morals are your actions, not what you say they are.

Undertoad · 11-30-2006, 12:15 PM

The pursuit of happiness is amongst the inalienable rights of man.

11-30-2006, 12:18 PM

Post #92 is about lots of things other than gay marrage... it is a red herring and a non-answer.
Again:

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

You did not answer. You have never stated, specifically, how gays getting married will affect you personally.

It is an easy question. What is the problem?

Flint · 11-30-2006, 12:22 PM

Do you support gay marriage? No, I don't support polygamy. Hey, look over there!

9th Engineer · 11-30-2006, 12:24 PM

You cannot say you support something but do not support the principles it is based on. Conversely, you cannot say you do not support something, yet claim to support the principles on which it is also based.

Flint · 11-30-2006, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

You cannot say you support something but do not support the principles it is based on. Conversely, you cannot say you do not support something, yet claim to support the principles on which it is also based.

Any argument can easily be made flawless, albeit only within the parameters in which you've framed it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

...I was very idealistic early on...

>>> pssst! you're still very idealistic!

Happy Monkey · 11-30-2006, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

You cannot say you support something but do not support the principles it is based on. Conversely, you cannot say you do not support something, yet claim to support the principles on which it is also based.

You can't come up with anything wrong with gay marriage, and make a vague "[polygamy] would probably cause harm overall" claim. Sounds to me like you have some additional principles that come into play with polygamy that you can't apply to gay marriage, in which case your attempt to join them in post 92 fails.

11-29-2006, 11:14 PM	#3
Aliantha trying hard to be a better person Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 16,493	Why can't you make one decision for the sake of that particular decision then worry about the next one when it happens? It seems to me you're more worried about who else besides gay people might be able to lay claim to the right to marry. From my perspective, I support gay marriage. I'm not sure what i think about polygamous marriages and so don't really have a point of view on that as yet other than that if all parties love each other then it would seem fair. Do you see the reasoning. One thing at a time. Might make life easier for yourself. __________________ Kind words are the music of the world. F. W. Faber

11-30-2006, 08:35 AM	#5
Ibby erika Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: "the high up north" Posts: 6,127	However, if you remove love from the equasion as 9th advocates, you DONT HAVE TO allow anything else... because, as I stated, saying someone can or can't do something based simply on their gender, for ANY reason, is sexism, and on as issue as important as marriage then it is completely, utterly unacceptable. That's not even in the same ballpark as allowing polygamy, bestiality, or anything else at all. __________________ not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh

11-30-2006, 12:22 PM	#12
Flint Snowflake Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dystopia Posts: 13,136	post #92 Do you support gay marriage? No, I don't support polygamy. Hey, look over there! __________________ **************** There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio**

11-30-2006, 12:24 PM	#13
9th Engineer Bioengineer and aspiring lawer Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 872	You cannot say you support something but do not support the principles it is based on. Conversely, you cannot say you do not support something, yet claim to support the principles on which it is also based. __________________ The most valuable renewable resource is stupidity.

11-29-2006, 11:53 PM	#4
bluecuracao in a mood, not cupcake Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 3,034	9th, you obviously recognize the legitimate point of view regarding gay marriage, but you're lumping it in with a bunch of other crap. Take a breather to separate the issues, and it will make more sense.

11-30-2006, 11:29 AM	#7
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	I've often seen a distinction being made nowadays, at least in written form, between "gay" (homosexual) and "ghey" (teh suxxors).

11-30-2006, 12:06 PM	#8
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	You did not answer. You have never stated, specifically, how gays getting married will affect you personally. It is an easy question. What is the problem?

11-30-2006, 12:14 PM	#9
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a	Your morals are your actions, not what you say they are.

11-30-2006, 12:15 PM	#10
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	The pursuit of happiness is amongst the inalienable rights of man.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)