Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 101

Thread: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM[W:95]

  1. #81
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,789

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Nonsense. Just another continuation of the spurious argument that everyone who opposes gay marriage must be a bigot or be against "gay" people.
    you'll have to be more specific
    i haven't seen anybody call somebody a bigot for simply thinking, believing, or preaching or teaching gay marriage is wrong or being gay is wrong. If they are out there they are wrong.

    I personally would support your right to feel and think that way etc

    but if people are activity trying to STOP equal rights, then yes they are bigots
    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. #82
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,789

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    1.)I made no false claims (perhaps you have me confused with the others who disagree with your OPINION).
    2.) And don't try to weasel out of what you've done, it's no distraction - stop altering the posts of others, period.
    3.) Learn how to insert quotes if you wish to respond point by point.
    1.) sorry thread history proves different and i have stated facts in this thread and some opinion.
    2.) yes its a deflection that nobody buys into.
    3.) takes to long and i think it makes the thread/reply look like junk and harder to respond too. No thank you.
    I like this convenient and courteous method to assure a poster know exactly what im responding for and it creates less confusion.
    If you do not sorry but the solution is easy, simply dont respond to me
    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

  3. #83
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    you'll have to be more specific
    i haven't seen anybody call somebody a bigot for simply thinking, believing, or preaching or teaching gay marriage is wrong or being gay is wrong. If they are out there they are wrong.

    I personally would support your right to feel and think that way etc

    but if people are activity trying to STOP equal rights, then yes they are bigots
    I quoted the post I was responding to, not difficult to find since you quoted my response to it. And once again, what YOU consider "equal rights" is not my standard for equal rights.

  4. #84
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.) sorry thread history proves different and i have stated facts in this thread and some opinion.
    2.) yes its a deflection that nobody buys into.
    3.) takes to long and i think it makes the thread/reply look like junk and harder to respond too. No thank you.
    I like this convenient and courteous method to assure a poster know exactly what im responding for and it creates less confusion.
    If you do not sorry but the solution is easy, simply dont respond to me
    So, you can't point to any "false claims" I've made in the thread, AND you consider your opinions as elevated to fact. Got it.

    The answer to your gross violation of forum etiquette is far simpler - stop doing it. It's is neither courteous nor is it appreciated.

  5. #85
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    not only true its factual. we are talking legal marriage contract , rights and precedence here. There is none that has been established with equal gay rights that magically loans itself to polygamy.

    anything polygamist would try would have nothing to do with equal gay rights, thats the point. If im missing something and you disagree point out the factual link that is solely based on equal rights for gays.

    You're attempting to be clever with the language by carefully framing the question in your own terms, however, the correct way to look at this is simple.

    Marriage "rights" did not exist for homosexuals in America until just recently.
    Marriage rights have always existed in America for men to marry women, and for women to marry men.
    Multiple partner marriage rights do not exist in America, and until just recently marriage rights were reserved for one demographic only.
    Allowing or extending marriage rights to any other group or demographic outside of the traditional reservation, opens up the potential for other groups to use the same argument that now extends rights to gays.

    Slippery Slope argument is one where a single event (A) is directly related to another future event (B), whereby if that first event had not occurred the future event would also not occur.

    In the case of gay marriage discrimination is the argument, and in that case the discrimination is based on gender (Which really is about sexuality). In the case of polygamists, the discrimination would be based on numbers, but discrimination is what is directly related to event (A) causing event (B).

    Need more?

    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  6. #86
    Assassin
    Verax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    9,477

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Nonsense. Just another continuation of the spurious argument that everyone who opposes gay marriage must be a bigot or be against "gay" people.
    So you oppose it why? Principle? The constitution? Some silly reason you invented so you could legitimize your position? Its such a stupid thing to spend time fighting when its none of your business and has no negative consequences.

    "I'm not against black people I just believe in separate but equal".

    "I'm not against black people I just think a business owner has the right to refuse service to anyone they choose".

    We've heard this crap before. Whether or not your motivation is to discriminate it doesn't really matter, the positions you hold have that effect and its unjust.

  7. #87
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    You're attempting to be clever with the language by carefully framing the question in your own terms, however, the correct way to look at this is simple.

    Marriage "rights" did not exist for homosexuals in America until just recently.
    Marriage rights have always existed in America for men to marry women, and for women to marry men.
    Multiple partner marriage rights do not exist in America, and until just recently marriage rights were reserved for one demographic only.
    Allowing or extending marriage rights to any other group or demographic outside of the traditional reservation, opens up the potential for other groups to use the same argument that now extends rights to gays.

    Slippery Slope argument is one where a single event (A) is directly related to another future event (B), whereby if that first event had not occurred the future event would also not occur.

    In the case of gay marriage discrimination is the argument, and in that case the discrimination is based on gender (Which really is about sexuality). In the case of polygamists, the discrimination would be based on numbers, but discrimination is what is directly related to event (A) causing event (B).

    Need more?

    Tim-
    Heya Hic!

    The problem here is that the slippery slope arguement doesn't work as well with any other group other than having multiple partners.

    It does not work for pedophilia because a child cannot consent due to lack of understanding, knowledge, and at least 17 years of experiance.

    It also does not work with beastiality because again, no animal can consent. They simply lack the brain capacity to do so.

    Necrophilia also does not work due to the simple fact that the being is dead.

    Incest does not work due to several variables, one of which being able to, over time, being able to convince the other "partner" that "incest isn't bad. This is usually done starting at a very young age. Basically it is brainwashing. Which takes a persons free will away without them realizing it. Another reason is the genetic problems caused by incestual breeding. That can put a burden on society.

    As far as polygamy/polyandry goes I have no problem with those being accepted as it involves consenting adults.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  8. #88
    Sage
    Hicup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Last Seen
    12-07-17 @ 03:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    7,846

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Heya Hic!

    The problem here is that the slippery slope arguement doesn't work as well with any other group other than having multiple partners.

    It does not work for pedophilia because a child cannot consent due to lack of understanding, knowledge, and at least 17 years of experiance.

    It also does not work with beastiality because again, no animal can consent. They simply lack the brain capacity to do so.

    Necrophilia also does not work due to the simple fact that the being is dead.

    Incest does not work due to several variables, one of which being able to, over time, being able to convince the other "partner" that "incest isn't bad. This is usually done starting at a very young age. Basically it is brainwashing. Which takes a persons free will away without them realizing it. Another reason is the genetic problems caused by incestual breeding. That can put a burden on society.

    As far as polygamy/polyandry goes I have no problem with those being accepted as it involves consenting adults.
    Agreed, but the slippery slope in the case of polygamy is not a fallacy which AGENTJ made claim to. It does apply, and it is not a fallacy.


    Tim-
    “When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O’Rourke
    “Socialism is great until you run out of someone elses money” Margaret Thatcher

  9. #89
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,789

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    1.)So, you can't point to any "false claims" I've made in the thread
    2.) AND you consider your opinions as elevated to fact. Got it.
    3.) The answer to your gross violation of forum etiquette is far simpler - stop doing it. It's is neither courteous nor is it appreciated.
    1.) already did
    2.) nope not what i said at all
    3.) you are welcome to that opinion i already gave you the solution if you are unhappy with this convenient and courteous method
    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

  10. #90
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,789

    Re: Gay Marriage Stirs Little Public Outcry in NM

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    1.)You're attempting to be clever with the language by carefully framing the question in your own terms, however, the correct way to look at this is simple.

    2.)Marriage "rights" did not exist for homosexuals in America until just recently.
    3.)Marriage rights have always existed in America for men to marry women, and for women to marry men.
    4.) Multiple partner marriage rights do not exist in America
    5.) and until just recently marriage rights were reserved for one demographic only.
    6.) Allowing or extending marriage rights to any other group or demographic outside of the traditional reservation, opens up the potential for other groups to use the same argument that now extends rights to gays.
    7.)Slippery Slope argument is one where a single event (A) is directly related to another future event (B), whereby if that first event had not occurred the future event would also not occur.
    8.)in the case of gay marriage discrimination is the argument, and in that case the discrimination is based on gender (Which really is about sexuality).
    9.) In the case of polygamists, the discrimination would be based on numbers, but discrimination is what is directly related to event (A) causing event (B).
    10.)Need more?

    Tim-
    1.) its not MY anything sorry this is false
    2.) marriage is a right PERIOD, gays haven been DENIED that right
    3.) yes
    4.) true although not sure of its totaly history here
    5.) what demographic are you referring, im dont know this to be true for any ONE demographic
    6.) you men granting equal rights to gays, this is where you instantly fail, because its you who is changing the langues to suit your false argument. this one is based on equality and ending discrimination the others are currently not.
    If you disagree bring up the example and ill show you why its false.

    not if you read the thread i said if there are laws out there that ban a specific group then that group would have some power but it would have nothing to do with gay marriage

    theres nothing SOLEY gay marriage does for OTHER groups in facts, reality, rights, precedence and discrimination. NOTHING. as always if you disagree bring up what you think an example is and it will fail.
    7.) i agree for the most part although it needs to be a little cleaner than that but yes and thats exactly why gay marriage isnt a slippery slope argument and it fails.
    8.) the argument has been TWO things

    A.) banning specifically against homosexuality, this has been found to violate equality
    B.) the other which has not his a supreme court is gender discrimination. Men can merry women so should a women be able to and vice versa

    those are the two arguments and only A has been in a supreme court and it won.

    9.) they could make this argument and it would relate to GAYS in anyway what so ever because NOBODY can merry more than one person. so the equality argument fails UNLESS there are laws somewhere that say pologamist cant merry then they could use discrimination for that and it would still have NOTHING to do with gay marriage.

    also polygamist have been trying to gain marriage rights before gays won case one.

    10.) yes because you havent provided on single factual slipper slope argument, they failed.

    so yes please MORE that are based SOLELY off of gay marriage, thanks for playing
    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

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 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
  •