Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 111

Thread: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Won’ (

  1. #31
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    I'm referring to the anti-gay marriage argument that always gets into the procreation argument.
    And when the procreation argument is revealed to be absurd, as it always is, what then? We don't require that straight couples be able to or willing to procreate before granting a marriage license, so clearly procreation and/or the raising of children has nothing whatsoever to do with getting married.

    I'm still waiting for the anti-gay-marriage crusaders to come up with a *REAL* argument.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  2. #32
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    Please. You just ran headlong into a wall. I hope it didn't leave a mark. Race has nothing to do with this issue. No matter how big an army of straw you throw at it.

    Even then, marriage was between a man and a woman. The absurdity of the issue related to skin color, not the sex of the individuals.
    This is EXACTLY the same argument that went on back in the day. Mixing the races was sinful, allowing people of different races to get married would ruin marriage, yadda yadda yadda. Same crap, different day.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  3. #33
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Think about how idiotic it is that the religious think that they get to control the English language and are clinging desperately to a word?

    Not just shameful, downright stupid.


    Well, think how rediculous it is to try and make this an issue about just what "religious" people think the word means.


    Here, this might help:

    This is a rock. It's not a donut. Identical concept.

    GabbroRockCreek1[1].jpg

  4. #34
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,129

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post


    Please. You just ran headlong into a wall. I hope it didn't leave a mark. Race has nothing to do with this issue. No matter how big an army of straw you throw at it.

    Even then, marriage was between a man and a woman. The absurdity of the issue related to skin color, not the sex of the individuals.
    But...it "changed" the definition of marriage. Prior to that....marriage was defined as a man/woman of the same race.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  5. #35
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    This is EXACTLY the same argument that went on back in the day. Mixing the races was sinful, allowing people of different races to get married would ruin marriage, yadda yadda yadda. Same crap, different day.
    It seems to me, the majority of people have no problem with same sex couple receiving the same recognition by the Federal Government as heterosexual couples do. However, they have strong opinions about changing the definition of the word that applies.

    As you're perhaps unwittingly proving, activists have made the main issue the definition of a word, and not the rights. That false effort is what has caused this issue to drag on for so many years, IMHO.

  6. #36
    Professor
    madman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    So. California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,936

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post

    The state's interest in marriage is supporting stable relationships for the sake of raising children and for economic stability.
    And that argument is laughable as well with the obscene percentage of NON "supporting stable relationships."
    Perhaps we should make divorce illegal, huh? After all, the state is interested in relationships, right?

  7. #37
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    But...it "changed" the definition of marriage. Prior to that....marriage was defined as a man/woman of the same race.
    No, it didn't. It changed the application laws related to skin color in the issue, not the sex of the individuals.

  8. #38
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    Well, think how rediculous it is to try and make this an issue about just what "religious" people think the word means.
    Because it's primarily the religious people who are arguing against gay marriage, on the basis that they somehow think they control the word "marriage" and they have an imaginary friend in the sky that tells them what to do. Once you throw out religious arguments and silly things like "I think it's icky", there really are no other arguments against allowing equality in marriage.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  9. #39
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,755

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    It seems to me, the majority of people have no problem with same sex couple receiving the same recognition by the Federal Government as heterosexual couples do. However, they have strong opinions about changing the definition of the word that applies.
    We've already had the debate on "separate but equal" nonsense and it's been found to be illegal. If two people do the same thing, it's absurd not to use the same word to refer to it. Why do you have such a hard-on for the word "marriage"?
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: TIME Magazine Features Two Covers, Two Couples, Declares ‘Gay Marriage Already Wo

    Quote Originally Posted by madman View Post
    And that argument is laughable as well with the obscene percentage of NON "supporting stable relationships."
    Perhaps we should make divorce illegal, huh? After all, the state is interested in relationships, right?
    The first step is in requiring comprehensive personal and financial pre-marital counseling so that dysfunctional marriages occur less often, and when there is a significant problem it can be fixed instead of leading to a divorce. After a couple has achieved the standard for their marriage license and marry, a divorce should require that every effort to save the marriage first be tried. Easy no-fault divorce should be removed from the law.

Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •