This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Drop by and say hi! (Recycle Bin)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
TheMediator
and calling them a complete retard because they have different views than you is just charming.
Natural Selection is a fact, if someone disagreed with that then yes I might call them a retard. I mean its not even a scientific theory, its flat out a fact.
Post by
Laihendi
The law says gays can't get married... legalizing it would UNDO that law, thus REDUCING their authority.
Post by
Dorean
This thread is about to drop below the pathetic line...
Post by
TheMediator
1. You admit you would not vote for something to legalize gay marriage.
2. It's already illegal for gays to get married in all but 2 (?) states, so of course you're not going to vote for that because it's already the law.
When you say something offensive to some people, and get called out on it... maybe instead of crying "it was taken out of context!" you should just step back and read what you're typing.
I wouldn't vote for anything that would allow government to regulate your right to marry anything or anyone Laihendi. If you find that offensive, it is your fault. If they made a bill that said "All laws made that regulate marriage will now be overturned", I would vote yes. You could then get married to a man if you wanted.
Stop making me out to be a jerk. Stop changing the subject when you are wrong. Stop going into my debate threads with the intention to derail. Just, stop.
Legalizing gay marriage would be a step towards deregulating marriage, but you said you are opposed to that.Yes I would be opposed to it. Making a law that made marriage legal would be acknowledging the authority of the government to grant you the right to get married. That is wrong.
You should be able to get married to anyone you want WITHOUT THIER AUTHORITY.
That was my whole point.
Yes you can already I'm fairly sure, although the government might not recognize it.
Post by
Sagramor
This thread is about to drop below the pathetic line...
This thread or this conversation?
The thread is awesome.
The conversation, on the other hand...
Post by
240135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
The law says gays can't get married... legalizing it would UNDO that law, thus REDUCING their authority.
No... repealing it would be undoing that law. Making ANOTHER law would be increasing the governmental authority. Sure, authority in line with how you see it, but still authority.
I would vote to repeal the anti gay laws. I would not vote for laws to support gay marriage.
Don't you see the difference?
Edit: to everyone that wants us out of the recycleing bin... too bad. I don't try to kick you guys out when you do interenet memes in repetition for dozens of pages...
Post by
240135
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
This is what happens every time. I make great points. I make an undeniable case for my arguement. Then, Laihendi exits stage left, and in about 2 days he will quote single phrases out of my arguement in other threads to take me out of context and make me into the bad guy.
This is why I hate debating with him.
Post by
TheMediator
I make an undeniable case for my arguement.
Don't pat yourself on the back too hard. If it was undeniable, then there would be no debate.
Post by
Sagramor
The thread is awesome.
The conversation, on the other hand...
Lets ignore them and talk about something else. :)
Like what you pretend to do with you army of non impressive boys?
Post by
Laihendi
The law says gays can't get married... legalizing it would UNDO that law, thus REDUCING their authority.
No... repealing it would be undoing that law. Making ANOTHER law would be increasing the governmental authority. Sure, authority in line with how you see it, but still authority.
They would be granting a freedom to a group of people, such a law would give protection against any legal action to take away their rights.
And if marriage is not a legal institution, and there are none of the legal bindings and privileges of marriage such as custody agreements (gay couples can adopt) and other things, then there is really no point in marriage.
This is what happens every time. I make great points. I make an undeniable case for my arguement. Then, Laihendi exits stage left, and in about 2 days he will quote single phrases out of my arguement in other threads to take me out of context and make me into the bad guy.
Seriously? You can't wait EIGHT MINUTES for a reply? Maybe Laihendi has some other stuff to do than argue with people over the internet right now... and he's trying to multitask.
Post by
MyTie
The law says gays can't get married... legalizing it would UNDO that law, thus REDUCING their authority.
No... repealing it would be undoing that law. Making ANOTHER law would be increasing the governmental authority. Sure, authority in line with how you see it, but still authority.
They would be granting a freedom to a group of people, such a law would give protection against any legal action to take away their rights.
And if marriage is not a legal institution, and there are none of the legal bindings and privileges of marriage such as custody agreements (gay couples can adopt) and other things, then there is really no point in marriage.
The people have that freedom. It doesn't take government to grant it to them. The right is inaliable by the constitution. Further laws are unconstitutional. And,means just as much, and more, than the legal bindings attatched to it. If it only means the judical implications attatched to it, then you shouldn't get married.
Post by
TheMediator
Seriously? You can't wait EIGHT MINUTES for a reply? Maybe Laihendi has some other stuff to do than argue with people over the internet right now... and he's trying to multitask.
Lies, we all know that you're a half troll half robot cyborg that roams around battling the denizens of the Randomness.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Sagramor
But...an army that takes over the world is impressive, therefore your army cannot.
Hah!
Post by
TheMediator
And,means just as much, and more, than the legal bindings attatched to it. If it only means the judical implications attatched to it, then you shouldn't get married.
Homosexuals have had gay relations for quite some time, and will continue to despite the inability to be recognized by the law as a couple. They're just saying that there's no reason why the law shouldn't be able to recognize a same sex couple, other than a dusty old tome (no offense, but it is pretty old and dusty).
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Dorean
But...an army that takes over the world is impressive, therefore your army cannot.
Hah!
Paradox ftw
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.