Page 35 of 61 FirstFirst ... 25333435363745 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 609

Thread: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overturn

  1. #341
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    I understand you aren't interested in the debate anymmore once I proved how easily your own argument can be used for so many other alternative lifestyles so let's agree to disagree on this one.
    Actually, I destroyed your argument in two ways. Firstly by showing it to be inaccurate, and secondly by demonstrating your hypocricy. So, there is no "agree to disagree" since your positon has been rendered invalid.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #342
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    You still haven't demonstrated how you are harmed by two guys getting married.
    Oh he's demonstrated that (to paraphrase) his feelings will be hurt if they legalize gay marriage. He would rather deny someone a right so his feelings won't get hurt.

  3. #343
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    And that's your stance. Because I am a practicing Christian it is completely logical for me to not support gay marriage due to my belief that homosexuality is a sin. You have simply called me ignorant without discussing the points and illustrations I have made.
    No, it would be completely logical for you not to practice homosexual acts due to your beliefs that it's a sin. It is not, however, logical in the slightest that you attempt to impose your beliefs on the populace in a secular society.


    And you have the right to legally marry a man, and i do not.
    Exactly. Inequality.

    The right to wed has to do with the opposite gender of what someone is.
    Duh. That's what we're working to change. Just like it used to be that men married 12 year olds against their will. That was changed. Just like women used to be the property of men when they wed, that was changed. Just like women were pretty much sold off in marriage. That was changed. Just like blacks couldn't marry whites. That was changed. Now, we're just going to change it yet again to coinicide with the changing of the times.

  4. #344
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    No, you're committing a logical fallacy there. Children and animals can't consent; therefore we can show just cause. If you hinge your argument on defintion, which is something that changes with time, you have to show a just casue or reason why your definition is to be imposed on others who have a different definition.
    Incorrect. A child can consent to sex. They can allow someone to have sex with them even though they aren't as mature. Many kids experience masturbation at young ages like 8 or 9. they can be attracted to the opposite sex and consent to sex. Animals can consent as well. They consent with each other, and who are you to judge what is the in the mind of an animal? My sisters female dog likes to hump people at times, so clearly she wants sex. My argument was for illustrative purposes to show you that anyone can claim that something is a "right."
    California was wrong to vote on something that is up to a vote. It is an individual right. The major has no say in who I marry, who I love, or how I express that love with an non related adult human. All other diversions must stand on their own. If there is no just reason, no harm shown, there is no reason to deny it. And it is not your place to decide this for others.
    That is only your opinion that it is an individual right. It is my opinion that it is not a right. The conflict was resolved by popular election to define marriage. When it's just my opinion against yours a vote is one logical conclusion when it comes to enacting policy and making legal definitions.
    That's garbage and has always been garbage. If the reverse was true and you were free to marry someone of the same sex, don't tell me you wouldn't feel put upon. And definition means nothing concerning this debate. Feel free to define your marriage however you want. But leave others to define it for themselves.
    Call it garbage, but it's truth. Homosexuals have absolutely the same rights that I have that are considered rights. Definition means everything with this debate, because Proposition 8 was about legally defining marriage. People can define marriage for themselves. A gay couple can call themselves married and have a ceremony, but their marriage is not legally recognized as marriage.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  5. #345
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by StevenA59 View Post
    I don't have to "prove" anything. I'm not the one trying to redefine marriage. I'm not the one trying to normalize homosexual behavior.
    Yeah, you do. Evidence has been presented that proves you wrong. If you want to demonstrate that your position is anything other than pointless blathering, it is up to you to present alternate evidence. Thus far, you have presented bupkis.



    My beliefs say that my kids should be raised in a culture free of exposure to sexual excesses and perversions.
    Your beliefs are irrelevant when it comes to legalities. You have no right to not be offended. Too bad.

    Just like they should be free from fear of rape, robbery or murder.
    These are legal issues, not beliefs. You fail again.

    Like I said above, the pro-GM argument remains, "we want it, we must have it, therefore it's ours."
    You can say that until you're blue in the face. It is still invalid. Evidence on the pro-GM side has been presented. The only thing you have presented is "I don't like it and I don't want it". That is why your posts have demonstrated a laick of logic or evidence. You have presented nothing, as is typical with the anti-GM crowd.

    There is no compelling argument, since gays already have nearly all rights of married couples. The real difference is in name only, which puts a lie to the whole "because we love each other" argument.
    The argument has been presented several times. You are holding your hands over your ears and screaming "LALALALALALALA" because the argument destroys your position.

    You've given no reasons whatsoever why millions of years of evolution, and thousands of years of culture, should be turned on its head for the sake of a few misfits.
    You have presented no evidence to counter the evidence presented. Obviously because you have NONE.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  6. #346
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by texmaster View Post
    I understand you aren't interested in the debate anymmore once I proved how easily your own argument can be used for so many other alternative lifestyles so let's agree to disagree on this one.

    Paraphrasing: Heavens to Murgatroyd, Exit Stage Left...



    Text, you are one funny guy.


  7. #347
    User
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-22-10 @ 03:32 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    111

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Then why did you take the time to respond? Just sayin'.
    D'oh!

  8. #348
    Global Moderator
    Truth will set you free
    digsbe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Metro Washington DC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,984

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    No, it would be completely logical for you not to practice homosexual acts due to your beliefs that it's a sin. It is not, however, logical in the slightest that you attempt to impose your beliefs on the populace in a secular society.
    why is it not logical for me to stand up for what I believe? Likewise by your logic, it would be illogical for you to impose your beliefs on marriage on the populace of a secular society. With our secular society we may vote based on our beliefs.
    Exactly. Inequality.
    It is not inequality. We have the equal right to marry the opposite gender of what we are.
    Duh. That's what we're working to change. Just like it used to be that men married 12 year olds against their will. That was changed. Just like women used to be the property of men when they wed, that was changed. Just like women were pretty much sold off in marriage. That was changed. Just like blacks couldn't marry whites. That was changed. Now, we're just going to change it yet again to coinicide with the changing of the times.
    And that's en example of why we should vote and voice our beliefs. Just like with my belief on abortion, I am trying to change the laws because I don't view them as morally acceptable and right. We've debated that topic much, and I know it's your belief that abortion should remain legal. My point with bringing that up, is that just because something is currently instated doesn't mean it's wrong. However, we always have the right to challenge and try to change what we believe is wrong. If you believe marriage defined as a union between one man and one woman is wrong, then it's your right to stand up for those beliefs and legally try to make your beliefs law. Likewise, it is equally right for me to voice my beliefs and try to keep things law if I believe they are right and to change other things that I believe are wrong. That's the beauty of living in a democratic society.
    When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. -Socrates
    Tired of elections being between the lesser of two evils.

  9. #349
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,725

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Digsbe... I'll tell you right now that the argument "gays have the same rights as straights... they can marry someone of the opposite sex just like me" is a loser argument. Ask yourself this question, honestly. What is the main reason that two people choose to get married, and THEN ask yourself if gays can do the same things as straights.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  10. #350
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    So anything anyone considers a "right" it is wrong to deny them of it? What about the right of pedophiles and those who practice bestiality? What about their "right" to marry a child or animal? It is your opinion through your definition of marriage that homosexuals have the right to marry. It is my opinion that homosexuals have no right to marriage because their union does not fit my definition of marriage.
    These are nothing more than attempts to appeal to the absurd. Neither animals or children can consent to sex with an adult nor can tehy enter any kind of contract. Further, both of the situations you mention can be proven to have injurious effects on the child or animal.

    As to what your definition of marriage is...you can have whatever definition you want. I don't care what your definition is and you, likely, have as much apathy for my personal definition of marriage. What this argument is about is how the LAW defines marriage and how it treats citizens. I'm not going to walk into your church and demand that you gay marry me; I would appreciate the same respect when I form a union with my partner by keeping your church out of my legal contracts.

    And you can define marriage for you. However, California opened up a vote to legally enact opinion and make it law. My side is imposing our definition of marriage, your side is imposing your definition of marriage. That's how most social/political debates are.

    Homosexuals have every right that any one else has. They can marry a person of the opposite sex just like everyone else. There are no laws against them, there are no rights denied to them that I don't have for myself. What those on the pro-gay marriage side want to do is create new "rights" through their definition of marriage. This whole debate is absolutely about the definition of marriage. Either it is a union between a man and woman or it's a union between two people regardless of gender or trans-gender.
    This is the single most obtuse and cowardly argument on the anti-gay marriage side of the debate; you can marry someone of the opposite sex just like I can. Well no ****, Sherlock. That doesn't make it equitable and it also diminishes marriage for everyone involved. It amuses me to no end that your type would rather a sham marriage devoid of romance, attraction and devotion take place so that you can have the right ratio of boy parts to girl parts to fit your sensibilities. You can sit here and rant and rave about homos tearing apart your marriages because they have buttsecks but you can't do the same with your 50% divorce rate. You wanna save marriage? Why aren't you out picketing divorce then?

    And no, homosexuals do NOT have the same rights heterosexuals do. You can inherit everything of your spouse's without the state laying claim to a portion but a gay couple cannot transfer property so easily. You can be guaranteed the right to visit your spouse in the hospital with no additional paperwork needed but a homosexual has to draw up expensive legal documents to guarantee that right. You can go before the state and not be concerned that your spouse will have to testify against you in court, but the homosexual does not have that security.

    It all boils down to this: you can name the object of your affection as your one irreplaceable person in this world to act and speak, legally, in your stead and the state and society have to accept their word as your word in all things because the law looks at you as a single entity. Homosexuals have no such rights. So don't sit there and tell me it's equal rights, pal. Don't sit there and smugly think you're on to something and that it settles the matter because it doesn't. It may be equal in a grossly simplistic fashion but it isn't liberty and it isn't freedom for the homosexual...not like you have it.

    And all because you have to cry foul over the use of a word for legal purposes by your fellow citizens. A word you don't own to start with and if you, as heterosexuals, had treated with more respect socially up until now, might not feel so diminished at all. The problem with the sanctity of marriage isn't homosexuals getting married. It's heterosexuals stomping all over the meaning of it all along and then acting as if they have a right to be indignant about it in light of how they've mistreated marriage while it was under their sole discretion.

    Do you mind if I laugh now because that's really the only response I have left?
    Last edited by jallman; 06-22-10 at 02:46 PM.

Page 35 of 61 FirstFirst ... 25333435363745 ... 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
  •