|
Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
10-17-2014, 01:44 PM | #61 |
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
|
Done.
Not seein' any "slippery-slope, straw man, weasel arguments" comin' from me. I do, however, see the point you make about voters and community standards. In the same way gay marriage supporters work to change minds (with the intent that law changes will follow), those who want privatized marriage would have to do the same. On one hand: you potentially get a hodge podge of laws wherein government continues to sanction couplings. On the other: you get potentially get a comprehensive restriction of the government. Crap shoot either way. Place your bets. As I say up-thread, I have no expectation my scheme (not really mine, as the link above illustrates) will come to pass in my life time, but I'll stick with the dark horse anyway. Last edited by henry quirk; 10-17-2014 at 01:56 PM. Reason: expansion |
10-17-2014, 02:47 PM | #62 |
Radical Centrist
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
|
Thank you sir I do appreciate it and I thank you for the conversation.
Slippery slope: Government reflecting community standards is wrong because the people could re-enact slavery. Straw man: "still not seein' why this suggestion is unworkable or so offensive" [therefore] "I can only conclude that the endeavor to secure government sponsored and licensed marriage for gays folks has less to do 'rights' and more to do with 'forcing approval'." (Because you don't understand something is no grounds to conclude anything at all) |
10-20-2014, 09:30 AM | #63 |
maskless: yesterday, today, tomorrow
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,162
|
You forgot to cite my 'weasel' arguments.
*shrug* |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|