Page 56 of 120 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866106 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 560 of 1200

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

  1. #551
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,803

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson 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.
    based on what facts?
    oh thats right NONE
    you are free to have that OPINION but thats all it will ever be
    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

  2. #552
    User Ari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Last Seen
    10-09-13 @ 08:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    109

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ontologuy View Post
    No, with regard to your first sentence, as there are mentally and emotionally intelligent people who are not biased but who recognize the word usage oxymoronic quick-fix error being attempted by political factions that would completely disrespect definitive propriety, definitive propriety that forms the foundation of our use of language to effectively communicate perceptions and concepts existing both today and in the past.

    Definitive propriety requires that we honor the meaning of words and not try to purposely corrupt their meaning to make them mean other than what they truly mean.

    For example, when differentiating between sex-gender, we do not call adult females "men", we call them "women", because if we corrupted the meaning of "men" to include females then the word "men" would no longer be of value as a descriptive word in both the past and present.

    Both men and women have the same human rights, however, they are simply named differently.

    In your example, yes, both a cat show and a dog show are a show, just like both men and women are people.

    As you go on to say, we still call them shows, .. and each cat show and dog show can create the same contests and prizes and the like with descriptions appropriate to the cat/dog show (best purr, loudest bark, best cat in show, best dog in show, etc.). But, the dog show and the cat show are still kept separate and referenced with separate terms.

    So when speaking of cat shows and dog shows they are always called "cat shows" and "dog shows" because the compound term is foundationally descriptive. They simply aren't called "shows" when being publically presented and referenced to avoid understandable confusion.

    Likewise, we don't call adult females "men", even though the syllable "men" is found in both the word "men" and the word "women".

    The word marriage has always been since its inception just before the agricultural revolution more than 12,000 years ago "between a man and a woman as husband and wife". That's what the word means. And comparatively microscopic numbers of occurrences of erroneous applications of the word throughout history from time to time in no way changes what marriage truly is any more than the similarly rare instance of calling a cat a dog justifies entering that cat in a dog show.

    But are the committed romantic relationships of same-sex couples any less a domestic partnership civil union than the committed romantic relationships of opposite-sex couples?

    Absolutely not, just like cat shows are every bit as ethically legitimate as dog shows.

    OS and SS couples' relationships should both be recognized by government and private enterprise.

    However, with respect to definitive propriety, the foundational test of words and their meaning, a test that comes first prior to ever speculating whether discrimination has occurred, an SS-couple's committed romantic domestic partnership civil union is simply not a "marriage" any more than a female adult is a "man".

    A female adult is a "woman".

    Both "woman" and "man" have the "man" syllable.

    And thus I have suggested "homarriage" to be the word used to describe the committed romantic domestic partnership civil union of a SS-couple.

    You have suggested "same-sex marriage".

    It seems to me that the only task left is indeed to create a new word that has meaning here in this case and create domestic partnership civil union statutes in every state and recognized by the federal government so that on the 1040 form etc. there would be added a separate status box called "homarried" or whatever is decided.

    When we respect definitive propriety we progress and become smarter.

    When we ignore definitive propriety and thus disrespect it, we regress, and dumb ourselves down.
    You normally spend a lot of time on your nonsense? The majority of this has no impact on what I said. I don't think anyone really cares about definitive propriety. Webster certainly doesn't.

  3. #553
    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
    Your presentation is false, obviously.
    No, it's historically accurate. Not to mention the fact that your claim is a meaningless tautology "If it isn't between a man and a woman, it's not marriage".

    Conservatives tend to assert the conclusion rather than argue it, and hope nobody notices. But we did notice.

  4. #554
    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 Bronson View Post
    Gay Marriage isn't real marriage. It's sham pretend marriage. The sexual behavior that happens between those 2 men is filthy and disgusting.
    It's strange how homophobes spend so much time thinking about male/male sex. Strange and telling.

  5. #555
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    No it doesn't breakdown. when you stop looking at changing the definition of marriage with tunnel vision and start focusing on the "what if''s" with a little more peripheral vision you can see with greater vision what the results could be in redefining marriage.

    Critical Thought, if you are a male, then it is common knowledge that males tend to see things using tunnel vision. That is of course until they are with their wives and this sweet thing walks pasts them that they desire a second look. Then they rely heavily on their peripheral vision because their head is locked in the straight forward position so not to give away to their wife that they are indeed enjoying the view. A little more peripheral vision Critical Thought in the results of redefining marriage. Incest for gays would be a slam dunk! After all at this point the moral compass has been flushed down the toilet!
    I still do not see what incest has to do with homosexuality. But I am gay and I find your statements ignorant and offensive. I do not take kindly to the argument that I do not have a moral compass.
    Last edited by CriticalThought; 09-10-13 at 08:41 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  6. #556
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long

    Quote Originally Posted by vesper View Post
    Thank you for acknowledging there is such a thing as a slippery slope. In redefining marriage to include same sex partners automatically changes culture as we know it. Incestuous relationships are illegal because they can produce deformed children. It could be argued that the law is meaningless to homosexuals who do not have the ability to reproduce. Family Law is currently being re-written because the traditional family is no longer the standard.
    Odd. I would say the push to legalize same sex marriage is because the culture has already changed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  7. #557
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 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
    "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.
    Your point is erroneous, and obviously so, as is your statement that it is "arbitrary" that marriage "is between a man and a woman as husband and wife".


    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    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?
    I've made it clear to you why mentally and emotionally intelligent society respects definitive propriety.

    It is you and those who want a quick-fix solution to the problem of getting government and private enterprise recognition of same-sex committed romantic domestic partnership civil unions that are making a mountain out of a molehill and disrespecting definitive propriety with your oxymoronic word approach.

    So, more appropriately directed, why do you care that SS-couples' relevant relationships not be called "homosexual marriage" or "homarriage"?

    That is the proper descriptive term.

    Why can't you just conform to definitive propriety like everyone else and stop agitating so much?

    If it's because it will take too long to get every state and the IRS to recognize "homarriage" statutes, that's understandable, though not an excuse.

    But if you have trouble with the proper definitive descriptive term, "homosexual marriage" or "homarriage", then my question is why does it bother you so?
    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. #558
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    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
    It's strange how homophobes spend so much time thinking about male/male sex. Strange and telling.
    Generally, the most vocally opposed to homosexuality are often closet homosexuals.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  9. #559
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:35 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 Ari View Post
    You normally spend a lot of time on your nonsense? The majority of this has no impact on what I said. I don't think anyone really cares about definitive propriety. Webster certainly doesn't.
    By calling the logical reasonable presentation I provided you "nonsense" you reveal your pre-conceived ideology at work that prevents you from accepting the truth of what I present.

    That there is so much acceptance of SS-couples' romantic relationship domestic partnership civil unions but so much resistance to calling those "marriages" is evidence that this is a huge issue in America today.

    Your "Webster" reference is meaningless, as many dictionary companies will simply let a small amount of time pass and then reassess word usage, and present only that, which, of course, does not mean that the definition-meaning of the word has changed, but that it is being used in a number of ways, some of which are erroneous.
    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?

  10. #560
    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 head of joaquin View Post
    It's strange how homophobes spend so much time thinking about male/male sex. Strange and telling.
    I'm not afraid of anyone but I appreciate your concern

Posting Permissions

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