 |
 |
Gay Marriage
| May 8th, 2014 at 2:43:25 PM permalink | |
| rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 189 Posts: 18762 |
Maybe on various forum boards, but in the courts this is a strawman argument. "whoever you love" A computer is not a recognized person (at least not yet). (Isn't "that" in place of "who" correct for English usage when referring to an object.) Gay rights advocates are not making the argument in court that you should be able to marry things. Sorry. This guy is playing the fool and being treated appropriately for it. You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
| May 8th, 2014 at 3:12:07 PM permalink | |
| Beethoven Member since: Apr 27, 2014 Threads: 18 Posts: 640 | LOL...it's not a strawman just because you claim it's one. That's discrimination. The guy can't help who he loves. Sounds like bigotry to me. Boron Boron Boron rhymes with moron, moron, moron |
| May 8th, 2014 at 4:34:44 PM permalink | |
| reno Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 58 Posts: 1384 |
Of course the definitions of words change over time. I'm confused as to why this would be controversial. Mouse used to mean rodent, and now it can refer to a computer accessory. This isn't controversial is it? Especially the word "marriage." In the Old Testament, Abraham had 3 wives. In the Book of Samuel, it says God gave David multiple wives. Go ahead and read the Holy Bible and you'll learn that Gideon, Ezra, Caleb, etc etc all those guys had plenty of wives. I could go on, but you get the idea. So yes, the word "marriage" has evolved over time. Judaism & Christianity have evolved too. I'm sorry you think this is so dumb.
Pretty certain that the Old Testament predates George Orwell. I could Google it for you. Hey, here's some trivia: did you know that the word "googol" was originally a mathematical word that referred to the number 1 followed by 100 zeros. It used to be a noun, and now it's a verb! Isn't it neat how the definition of words change over time? |
| May 8th, 2014 at 4:46:39 PM permalink | |
| rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 189 Posts: 18762 |
Opponents of gay marriage may be making this argument in court but no gay advocacy groups are. You are supposing to take the argument away from them, but they aren't even making it in a court of law so you can't take it away from them. That is a strawman. Setting up a false premise for the opposition and knocking it down. "Look what the gays are claiming". They are not-- in a court where it counts. There may be some saying such things on forums somewhere, but I already said that may be happening. You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
| May 8th, 2014 at 4:59:47 PM permalink | |
| Beethoven Member since: Apr 27, 2014 Threads: 18 Posts: 640 | Nope, not at all. You seem to think something's a strawman just because you say it is. Sorry, it doesn't work that way...lol Boron Boron Boron rhymes with moron, moron, moron |
| May 8th, 2014 at 5:01:35 PM permalink | |
| Beethoven Member since: Apr 27, 2014 Threads: 18 Posts: 640 |
Actually, your side is the one who thinks it's dumb. The guy in Florida wants to change the definition of 'marriage' so that he can marry his computer. I'm sorry you think this is so dumb. ___________________________________________ On another note... Openly Gay Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson Announces Divorce LOL! Boron Boron Boron rhymes with moron, moron, moron |
| May 8th, 2014 at 5:18:01 PM permalink | |
| rxwine Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 189 Posts: 18762 |
Then you can prove it. If I say some Republican Congressman is repeatedly filing motions to have gay marriage banned in Washington DC, I have to prove it. If you say gay advocates have filed court arguments, as their arguments that marriage of things/objects is what they want, then it can be proved and would not be a strawman. You are not taking that argument they are not making away from them. So, prove it. Or you are just trolling. Which is it? You believe in an invisible god, and dismiss people who say they are trans? Really? |
| May 8th, 2014 at 5:18:24 PM permalink | |
| reno Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 58 Posts: 1384 |
You crack me up. In the Book of Timothy (chapter 1 verse 3) Paul changes the rules and commands the righteous to have 1 single wife, ending the the Old Testament's blessing of multiple wives. So Paul was a liberal? Ha! News to me! Conservatives aren't opposed to changing the definition of words, right? Surely conservatives aren't offened if Davy Crockett's use of the word "cabin" varies significantly from an airline pilot's use of the word "cabin." That would be silly. |
| May 8th, 2014 at 5:21:54 PM permalink | |
| AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18210 |
"Googol" is NOT a verb. "Google" has become a verb. Since I know the difference I probably know the mathematical origin, I also know what a "Googolplex" is. Here is the difference, which I googled. The President is a fink. |
| May 8th, 2014 at 5:46:59 PM permalink | |
| Face Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 61 Posts: 3941 |
But I fail to see how he combats that opinion. After all, it's "whomever" that is the argument, not "whatever". I still can't see the difference between this type of argument, and those who say "if you think it's ok to tote an AR for self defense, it should be ok for me to have a nuke". It's simply absurd. I guess my point is, on both sides, there are perfectly liable and well thought ways to combat opposing opinion. I know that in my younger days, I was highly "pro-gay rights". I used to become livid at those who were against it, and thought they were pent up, hyper religious, fuddy duddying old bigots. It was our own AZDuffman who, through rational debate and well thought out points, gave me pause and caused me to think. Sure, I still think the gov should stay out of the bedroom and have no problem with two dudes or two chicks shacking up. But he made me question what it is that I really believed, and helped me to refine my belief into what it is today. He didn't change my mind, no. But he sure helped me be not such an uninformed asshole about it. And that's what this debate needs. The extremists have the mic now, and have had it for some time. "Pro gay" has reached almost militant levels, at least in my small peer group. And "tolerance" has lost its entire definition; last I checked its modern definition it hovered somewhere around "tolerate my belief or die in a fire". And who's gonna win if the extremists are the ones blazing the path? None a single one of us. I just can't laud guys like this. He's simply a different side of a same, disturbing coin. Be bold and risk defeat, or be cautious and encourage it. |