Page 46 of 53 FirstFirst ... 364445464748 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 524

Thread: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287:411]

  1. #451
    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: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    What arguments have i made that are subjective?
    all of them
    in FACT you haven't provided one that is not subjective . . . not one . . .

    if you disagree simply present it now and ill gladly point out why its subjective and meanignless
    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. #452
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287:411]

    I'm sure that whatever you just posted was very nice.

  3. #453
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,076

    Re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    No, as getting married is not itself a sexual act.
    But that's not the standard you initially put for being unnatural. You initially made it clear that whether procreation would be excluded was what mattered in making something natural and unnatural. Which is why sex with a woman who can't procreate is unnatural, as you clearly declared here:

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Only that has no real bearing on my question: Is a person, who willingly chooses to have sex with someone that they know that they can't procreate with, engaging in an unnatural act?
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    If the act itself is unnatural, then yes. If the act itself is not unnatural, then no.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    So then, any sexual act which excludes procreation by its very nature is unnatural? Yes?
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    Yes that is correct.
    Just so I get this straight then:

    A bisexual male/female couple where the couple has children is natural.
    A homosexual couple where they engage in no sex for reasons such as illness, distance, etc is natural as they engage in no sexual act.
    A heterosexual couple who has sex with contraception is unnatural (as they engage in sex for something other than its intended purpose).
    A young homosexual couple where there is sex is unnatural.
    An elderly couple where contraception was always used and resulted in no children is unnatural.

    Am I getting this right?
    Last edited by Hatuey; 06-22-14 at 05:20 PM.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  4. #454
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    But that's not the standard you initially put for being unnatural. You initially made it clear that whether procreation would be excluded was what mattered in making something natural and unnatural. Which is why sex with a woman who can't procreate is unnatural, as you clearly declared here:




    Just so I get this straight then:

    A bisexual male/female couple where the couple has children is natural.
    A homosexual couple where they engage in no sex for reasons such as illness, distance, etc is natural as they engage in no sexual act.
    A heterosexual couple who has sex with contraception is unnatural (as they engage in sex for something other than its intended purpose).
    A young homosexual couple where there is sex is immoral (same as above).
    An elderly couple where contraception was always used and resulted in no children is unnatural.

    Am I getting this right?
    A sexual act is unnatural if procreation is excluded. A non-sexual act need not be procreative (indeed the act of getting married is never procreative in itself).

    Except that you are speaking of couples rather than acts, that is correct.

  5. #455
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,076

    Re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    A sexual act is unnatural if procreation is excluded.
    So then your position is that the only sex that is natural is that which is done with the intent of procreating? Yes?
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  6. #456
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    So then your position is that the only sex that is natural is that which is done with the intent of procreating? Yes?
    The act must at least be open to procreation.

  7. #457
    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: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287:411]

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    I'm sure that whatever you just posted was very nice.
    just pointing out the fact that all your arguments are subjective and they all fail.
    If you disagree prove otherwise, we'd love to read it, thanks
    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

  8. #458
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287:411]

    I'm sure that whatever you just posted was very nice.

  9. #459
    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: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287:411]

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleocon View Post
    I'm sure that whatever you just posted was very nice.
    Please address the topic im not the topic, thank you.
    The fact is all your arguments are subjective and they fail. If you disagree please prove otherwise.
    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. #460
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    06-30-16 @ 07:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287:411]

    I'm sure whatever you posted was very nice.

Page 46 of 53 FirstFirst ... 364445464748 ... 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
  •