- Joined
- May 22, 2011
- Messages
- 4,310
- Reaction score
- 2,603
- Location
- Golden City of the Risen Dead
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
Calm down, mayn. I'm with you...you do know what's devil's advocate means, right?
Hint; it's not a straw man.
I think he was just playing back that's why he called it a devils straw man?
But I could be totally wrong he'll have to answer?
Jet's pretty sharp. He rarely says something without knowing what he's getting at.
I agree I like Jet
I like me too.
Eww your "icky"
I didn't know your were a Homo-oogieman-sexual!
I don't like you any more and NO you can not marry yourself!!!!
Homosexuality and SSM is against my religious beliefs, I don't believe that one is born gay or has no control over becoming gay, and I have not seen any scientific study to prove that wrong.
I don't believe homosexuals are "evil" or "disgusting" or any other derogatory name anyone would assign them. I believe they should be treated with the same dignity and respect as any other person.
so you are for gay rights then?
MAC you still out there, I'm waiting for you answer.
Jet's pretty sharp. He rarely says something without knowing what he's getting at.
Subtly is lost over the internetz.
If so, sorry Jet.
A few points, lpast.
1) What precisely is wrong with "normalizing the abnormal?"
2) The single male loving their parents is an apples to oranges comparison.
3) SSM is NOT merely about getting financial benefits.
Sorry, missed the question. I support human rights....I don't think that being gay gives you specific rights.
What specific rights? Free speech, marriage, to own property?
so you view marriage as just financial and nothing else? Please explain the logic behind that.
also you do know you did EXACTLY what CC sai you would do, you spoke in absolutes based on your opinions and not logic or facts. Just saying.
Anyway please continue, its interesting the SS thing you brought up though IMO that has nothing to do with gay marriage it seems you problem is with how SS is handled.
The right to marry someone of the same gender.
Sorry, missed the question. I support human rights....I don't think that being gay gives you specific rights.
So discrimination based on gender is okay?
If your going to normalize the abnormal for one small group then you can expect other abnormal groups to expect the same and they would have a "RIGHT" to feel that way.
A single person loving their parents is very much the same thing when it comes to passing on your social security and covering them with health benefits and tax breaks.
It has everything to do with gay marriage...you allow homosexuals to marry and the surviving spouse gets their social security adding even more strain to a system that is broken.
If your going to normalize the abnormal for one small group then you can expect other abnormal groups to expect the same and they would have a "RIGHT" to feel that way.
A single person loving their parents is very much the same thing when it comes to passing on your social security and covering them with health benefits and tax breaks.
Not unless you can show that the single person planned to spend their life with their parents, using the money they earned to help in that support.
There is a reason that SS works the way it does for married couples and that is because in many married relationships, it is very common for one person to be making most, if not all, of the money in the relationship while the other person takes care of the domestic responsibilities for the two of them and possibly their children (if there are any). Because of this sharing of responsibilities during the marriage, it is assumed by the government that the money was considered shared by the couple during the marriage and those SS benefits were technically from money that was earned during that time, so therefore it should be shared between the couple later in life.
Trying to apply that to a person living with their parents would be different, since they are not going to be involved in the same sort of relationship. There could be an option for a similar contract like marriage to deal with those rare cases where it might happen, although, in a way it does for certain people who receive SS from their parents' work, while they are considered legally minors and their parents die. Such a contract shouldn't be called marriage though, since it is not involving the same aspects of marriage, including the expectation that the two will stay together for a good portion of their lives, despite who else may come along (which is not a logical expectation of any purely famial relationship, since it is generally accepted that children become independent of their family once they become adults).
Why is it -morally- wrong?What's your beef. Honest to [expletive-deleted], why DO YOU care? Why are you just fine with an entire segment of the populace being denied the right to marry.
I dont disagree with your post...what I disagree with is allowing two men to marry and pass on SS and not allow singles to do the same for their parents...they both pay the same into SS without the same rights...along with all other groups that are not the norm....how do you justify allowing one group that is outside the norm the right to do something that is not allowed for other groups outside the norm..that is DISCRIMINATION and homosexuals want to be treated special...and I do not agree with that