- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 156,720
- Reaction score
- 53,497
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
He just did. You didn't read his response.
No she didn't. Not at all.
If you use an argument of "human rights" to argue for gay marriage and it is upheld based on that argument, you could never limit any humans in any number from demanding the same thing based on the same argument.
That's irrelevant, since I NEVER use the human rights position to argue for GM. It's a loser of a position.
Then you should be disappointed in this board denying the vote by the people. Yet you are not. Why?
Because if elected officials vote for something when the majority of their constituency did not support it, the officials are not doing their jobs.