Page 8 of 35 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 347

Thread: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

  1. #71
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by joe six-pack View Post
    Clearly you don't. Must be a miscommunication somewhere.
    Most likely your inability, willfull or otherwise, to comprehend a statement in the context it was made.

    So are saying you don't believe same-sex marriage is a slippery slope. Good, at least we agree on that.
    No.. I am saying that there is no necessary relationship between the two concepts your tried to relate together. As such, your argument to that effect is unsound.

    There is no valid reason--legal or otherwise--to oppose same-sex marriage. I've never read a post that provided such a reason.
    Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Ignorance

  2. #72
    Educator joe six-pack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Six-Pakistan
    Last Seen
    07-19-11 @ 07:59 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,123

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Your legal ability to have a gun or a trial by jury were not granted to you by the government - they are rights that pre-exist government.
    In correct. Trial by jury is an entity created by the Government, it's not a "right" given naturally to human beings. Neither is "voting." There is no natural "right" to own a fire-arm.

    Those were all legal concepts designed through legal Governmental processes. While I agree the Government doesn't "create" natural rights, it does create legal rights.

    The only natural rights I know of are the rights to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness. I never heard "God" say, yo, man you have the right to own a AK-47.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    "In the technical sense--by the economic definition--President Obama is not a socialist," - 4-10-2010
    Do you want to have a debate? Hit the reply button.

  3. #73
    Educator joe six-pack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Six-Pakistan
    Last Seen
    07-19-11 @ 07:59 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,123

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Most likely your inability, willfull or otherwise, to comprehend a statement in the context it was made.

    No.. I am saying that there is no necessary relationship between the two concepts your tried to relate together. As such, your argument to that effect is unsound.

    Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Ignorance
    In other words, you are unable to simply make a argument on your own.

    All you are doing is stating "I'm right and you are wrong" and posting to some website to make your argument for you. Pathetic.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    "In the technical sense--by the economic definition--President Obama is not a socialist," - 4-10-2010
    Do you want to have a debate? Hit the reply button.

  4. #74
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by joe six-pack View Post
    In correct. Trial by jury is an entity created by the Government, it's not a "right" given naturally to human beings. Neither is "voting." There is no natural "right" to own a fire-arm.
    Please cite for me the constitutional, legislative or regulatory languange that positively grants you the right to own a firearm.

  5. #75
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by joe six-pack View Post
    In other words, you are unable to simply make a argument on your own.
    Nothing in anything that I have posted here requires me to make any argument regarding the constitutionality of state provisions that do not allow same-sex marriange.
    I have, however, pointed out logical/factual/other flaws in the arguments that YOU have presented, which is a perfectly valid thing to do.

    For instance, your argument that "I've never read a post that provided such a reason" is, without question, an appeal to ignorance.

  6. #76
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,763

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Please cite for me the constitutional, legislative or regulatory languange that positively grants you the right to own a firearm.
    What is the Second Amendment? What do I win for giving the right answer, Alex?
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by joe six-pack View Post
    Actually, it's a "subjective" judgment, not necessarily concerning morals. But nice try.
    No. Right and wrong are moral valuations. We're not discussing the wrong answers to the problem 2 + 2 = ?.

    People who claim same sex marriage is wrong are making moral judgements on the actions of others. That it's wrong for them to make those judgements is a different moral assessment.

    MYOB rules.

    I often hear this argument from the Right; same people who believe everything in nature has a purpose. That's why they call it an "intelligent design."
    Which does nothing to address the correct assessment that over time all behaviors either serve, or do not serve, evolution of the species, as do all inherited physical traits.

    Evolution happens when indivduals get together and produce offspring. The extinction of genetic lines happens when they do not.

    Welcome to what happens in the real world.

    Just because you don't understand the purpose of homosexuality in nature, doesn't mean that it doesn't have a purpose.
    First you complain about the right wingers and their idiot "intelligent design", then you want to pretend a genetic flaw or a behavioral defect has a "purpose".

    Make up your mind.

    Nature has a way of stabilizing a population, keeping the ecosystem in balance.
    No. Nature has a way of killing species as their ecosystems equilibrates to new states driven by a wide variety of forcing functions.

    "Balance" is a static term that fails to encompass the dynamic nature of entropically driven biological systems.

    I believd that the purpose of homosexuality is to keep the population relatively stable. There are almost seven billion people on the planet and the number is increasing exponentially. In the 1800s there were only about a billion people on the planet.
    You believe in some form of intelligent design. Thank you for confirming this.

    The maladaptation represented by homosexuality has no special function in the plan for humanity because there is no plan.

    Maybe there is a purpose that you simply don't understand.
    Maybe you don't want to face the reality that there's no plan.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    It does when you are explaining to someone where the idea that marriage is a right/privilge to somone who asks - which is exactly what I was doing.
    The right doesn't exist.

    More importantly than that, the right of one person to tell two other consenting legal adults they can't marry doesn't exist, either.

    The interesting question is what are those people afraid of?

  9. #79
    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
    32,880
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Why is it that whenever marriage and homosexuality comes up it inevitably turns towards "there is no use for homosexuality because it serves no purpose"? There's no use for the dingle dangly thing in the back of your mouth either...yet it is there. Plus marriage is not about producing offspring. If it was then people would be required to have kids when they were married. And we all know that is not the case.
    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

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Court won't force state to defend Prop. 8

    Quote Originally Posted by joe six-pack View Post
    There is no natural "right" to own a fire-arm.
    Wrong.

    The freedom to own weapons predates the existence of homo sapiens as a species, and in fact, is one of the factors that allowed homo sapiens to evolve at all.

Page 8 of 35 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... 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
  •