Page 55 of 120 FirstFirst ... 545535455565765105 ... LastLast
Results 541 to 550 of 1200

Thread: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

  1. #541
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Definitions of words change. Deal with it.
    Marriage is and always has been "between a man and a woman as husband and wife".

    That's reality.

    Anything other than that is/was simply not a "marriage".


    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    And by the way: no, marriage has not always been defined as between one man and one woman. It used to be any number of women, and it was really better described as "one man and his property." Because the wife was literal property being transferred from the father to the new husband.
    If there is one man and 10 women, that's either 10 separate marriages or not a marriage.

    It really is that simple.


    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    And then there was that "it's always been one man and one woman of the same race" aspect. (see, people made "they're changing my definition!" arguments against interracial marriage too)
    If a culture restricted marriages such that people of different races were not allowed to marry, that did not in any way change what marriage is and always has been: between a man and a woman as husband and wife.

    Marriages that never happened (inter-racial marriages) in a culture are meaningless.

    What's meaningful is the marriages that did happen, in that, no matter what the mix or lack thereof racially in the marriage, if said relationship is "between a man and a woman as husband and wife" then it was still a marriage, and if it wasn't, then it wasn't.

    Again, it really is that simple.

    Activists and other ideologues are compelled with creating the quick-fix oxymoronic "gay marriage" reference of marriage to allow SS couples.

    But, of course, that doesn't make it any more accurately correct to call same-sex relationships a "marriage" than it does to allow cats to be included in a dog show and still call it a "dog show".

    The ludicrousness of referencing a SS couple's relationship as a "marriage" is simply that.

    "homosexual marriage" or "Homarriage" would be a more accurate term.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

  2. #542
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Major_Alan_G._Roger_at_Same-Sex_Wedding_Ceremony.jpg

    Hey look a couple getting MARRIED!

  3. #543
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Major_Alan_G._Roger_at_Same-Sex_Wedding_Ceremony.jpg

    Hey look a couple getting MARRIED!
    yep you are 100% correct
    and that beach didnt even fall into the ocean. weird right?
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  4. #544
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Last Seen
    09-18-16 @ 03:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,029

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    Marriage is and always has been "between a man and a woman as husband and wife".

    That's reality.

    Anything other than that is/was simply not a "marriage"..
    This is both unhistorical and tautological, so I give you credit for two fallacies in one.

  5. #545
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,847

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    Marriage is and always has been "between a man and a woman as husband and wife".

    That's reality.

    Anything other than that is/was simply not a "marriage".



    If there is one man and 10 women, that's either 10 separate marriages or not a marriage.

    It really is that simple.



    If a culture restricted marriages such that people of different races were not allowed to marry, that did not in any way change what marriage is and always has been: between a man and a woman as husband and wife.

    Marriages that never happened (inter-racial marriages) in a culture are meaningless.

    What's meaningful is the marriages that did happen, in that, no matter what the mix or lack thereof racially in the marriage, if said relationship is "between a man and a woman as husband and wife" then it was still a marriage, and if it wasn't, then it wasn't.

    Again, it really is that simple.

    Activists and other ideologues are compelled with creating the quick-fix oxymoronic "gay marriage" reference of marriage to allow SS couples.

    But, of course, that doesn't make it any more accurately correct to call same-sex relationships a "marriage" than it does to allow cats to be included in a dog show and still call it a "dog show".

    The ludicrousness of referencing a SS couple's relationship as a "marriage" is simply that.

    "homosexual marriage" or "Homarriage" would be a more accurate term.
    See, you're doing this silly thing where you decide that changing the racial aspect didn't count as a definition change but changing the gender aspect is a definition change. It's a completely arbitrary line you're drawing in a silly effort to... do what, exactly? Create a separate but equal legal union definition for homosexuals?

    Surely you recognize the problems with anything of that nature: Separate but equal is inherently unequal. It attaches a government-approved stigma where those people aren't good enough to use our [schools|word]. So, what justifies this? The fact that some people really want to make sure the gays don't use their word?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  6. #546
    Sage
    shrubnose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Europe
    Last Seen
    11-29-17 @ 03:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,851
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by head of joaquin View Post
    This is both unhistorical and tautological, so I give you credit for two fallacies in one.



    Marriage is whatever the government that controls the area in which it takes place says it is.




    "Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll

  7. #547
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by head of joaquin View Post
    This is both unhistorical and tautological, so I give you credit for two fallacies in one.
    Your presentation is false, obviously.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

  8. #548
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    See, you're doing this silly thing where you decide that changing the racial aspect didn't count as a definition change but changing the gender aspect is a definition change.
    Actually, it's you who is doing the silly thing by saying that "marriage is and always has been between a man and a woman of the same race as husband and wife"!

    As we all reasonably know, what a marriage is from the get-go over 12,000 years ago and remains so today is fundamentally between a man and a woman as husband and wife.

    Nothing more, nothing less.

    It is you who is trying to interject something into the globally time-honored reality of marriage that does not globally apply.


    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    It's a completely arbitrary line you're drawing in a silly effort
    No .. but that's clearly what you are doing.


    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    to... do what, exactly? Create a separate but equal legal union definition for homosexuals?
    Your assessment here, that using "homosexual marriage" or "homarriage" as the term to apply to SS-couples' committed romantic domestic partnership civil unions is a violation of "separate but equal" is simply false, as your assumption fails with respect to the definitive propriety foundation that marriage is and always has been "between a man and a woman as husband and wife".

    Thus your complaint is invalid.

    Your complaint is the same as cat owners complaining that they can't appropriately and rationally call their cat shows "dog shows".

    That cat owners have cat shows separate from dog show owners who have dog shows and that they call their cat shows "cat shows" is out of respect for definitive propriety, the foundation first considered before any assessment is made about discrimination.

    Thus, in this example, it is not a violation of "separate but equal" that cat owners appropriately call their shows "cat shows" and not "dog shows".

    Likewise, it is not a violation of "separate but equal" that SS-couples call their relationships "homosexual marriage" or "homarriage" because, by definition, SS-couples don't belong in a "marriage".

    It really is that simple.


    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Surely you recognize the problems with anything of that nature: Separate but equal is inherently unequal. It attaches a government-approved stigma where those people aren't good enough to use our [schools|word]. So, what justifies this? The fact that some people really want to make sure the gays don't use their word?
    All false.

    I've just explained it to you again above.

    Your complaint about "separate but equal" is false, running afoul of the definitive propriety test that is applied first.

    Once definitive propriety is applied, it is clear that SS-couples' relationships don't qualify for the term "marriage".

    Thus these relationships require a different term to satisfy the foundational definitive propriety test.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

  9. #549
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,847

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    Thus these relationships require a different term to satisfy the foundational definitive propriety test.
    "Cat" and "Dog" have inherent differences in meaning. Marriage does not. There's nothing intrinsic to marriage that requires the couple be of opposite sex. Your definition is arbitrary.

    And further question:

    Who cares? Why is the definition so critical to your cause? Why is it so important that we don't define marriage in a different way? Do you actually oppose same-sex marriage or is this literally arguing semantics over rights?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  10. #550
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Hey look 2 guys playing dress up and pretending

    Gay Marriage isn't real marriage. It's sham pretend marriage. The sexual behavior that happens between those 2 men is filthy and disgusting.

Posting Permissions

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