• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]

CaptainCourtesy said:
Anyone who knows how to discuss an issue rationally and logically knows that everything you have said in this thread has no credibility. You cannot prove cause and you cannot prove an accurate analogy. Your argument is nothing more than a logical fallacy and no matter how much you scream "nuh, uh" it doesn't alter the fact that you have proven that you don't know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

Again another attempt to discredit me by your OPINIONS. Sorry your claim my arguments are logical fallacies is getting really stale.
 
vesper said:
Again another attempt to discredit me by your OPINIONS. Sorry your claim my arguments are logical fallacies is getting really stale.
Click to expand...

You've been discredited by logic and information. Most of your posts in this thread are just you repeating the same refuted position.
 
CriticalThought said:
Here is the fact. Lucky Larry cited he could post studies that gay parents are child molesters. You didn't say a word to him. I posted that I could refute that if he didn't back up his claim. You then argue that ANYTHING I would post would inevitably be "bogus". Fact is you completely destroyed any credibility you had in this thread because you made it perfectly clear you don't give a crap about evidence. If it does not agree with what you believe, you will deliberately ignore it. That is by definition, confirmation bias. You are free to do it, but don't pretend that you are anything less than biased as all hell on this issue.
Click to expand...

Board rules do not require me to "say a word" to anyone.

Lets see, I'm biased if I don't buy into a slew of biased reports? LOL. No. it just means I'm not stupid.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
Board rules do not require me to "say a word" to anyone.

Lets see, I'm biased if I don't buy into a slew of biased reports? LOL. No. it just means I'm not stupid.
Click to expand...

Yet we've already seen you buy into at least ONE biased report. How do we know that you wouldn't buy into scores of others that support the same failed position. Oh, wait... that would be a slippery slope, wouldn't it? :lol:
 
CriticalThought said:
Here is the beauty of the "slippery slope" argument. I can just as easily argue the proposed consequences to society will occur as a result of NOT legalizing same sex marriage.

For example, pretty much every country that has legal polygamy does NOT allow same sex marriage. Maybe if we DON"T legalize same sex marriage it will lead to the legalization of polygamy. Makes about as much sense as the arguments I hear people making that legalizing same sex marriage will lead to polygamy.

You believe that homosexuals are rampant child molesters in waiting? Perhaps NOT legalizing same sex marriage is irresponsible then because that puts those dangerous homos in consensual, adult relationships.
Click to expand...

I think people that think like you may be some of the most dangerous to all of us. You over exaggerate on just about everything showing you do not have the potential to be even handed.

You accuse others of stating things they did not to further your argument. I know for a fact that to be the case because you have twisted my words on several occasions. Before you go any further, may I suggest you study the history of homosexuality. And in that study learn WHY in about 324 AD or so governments started creating laws against it. Until then I have a drawer full of socks. I'll let you pick whatever one you want to stick it in the appropriate place.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Of course you don't. It wouldn't work out well for you.



That was ONE study. There are scores of them that show that signficant portions of the population have no idea how to use a condom correctly. Here you go:

Condom use 101: Basic errors are so common, study finds - NBC News.com

This is now twice out of two times I've show you to be incorrect.



No, as I showed, the irony is on you. You posted a refuted study. You have now been shown by a METAstudy that errors in condom usage is pretty common.
Click to expand...

Good to see you not destroying the "I" on your keyboard tonight. Who says some people never learn?

Things almost always work out well for me, thank you. There is nothing you could say or do to change that. Feel free to try though.

You haven't shown me to be incorrect on anything. I know it makes you feel good to say otherwise and that's OK. But the fact is, you like most liberals in this thread keep saying some people are incorrect, wrong, or whatever and the only thing you can back it up with is repeating the same or citing some politically correct bogus "study" that many members of the group doing the peer reviews are afraid to comment on freely. The thought police have become that powerful in what used to be respectable organizations.


LOL. Now you go and change the rubber study. Just when I was starting to get used to the first one you posted. Did they use more than 20 guys in this new one you posted? I hope so. Using just 20 people in a scientific study should have sounded a little bogus to you to begin with. Why didn't it? Could it be that you didn't think about it, you just wanted to post something thinking nobody would notice how silly a study it was?
 
ItAin'tFree said:
Board rules do not require me to "say a word" to anyone.

Lets see, I'm biased if I don't buy into a slew of biased reports? LOL. No. it just means I'm not stupid.
Click to expand...

You are biased because you dismissed my evidence before I even posted it and you had any chance to read it.

You are biased because one poster made a claim that he could post studies and articles to support a point you apparently agree with and you said nothing but when another poster replied that he could post studies refuting those claims you responded to him that anything he would post would be "bogus".

You are biased because while you argue that the evidence for my side is inherently flawed, you have yet to comment regarding the quality of the evidence that the other poster suggested he could offer this debate.

So yeah, you are BIASED!
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Yet we've already seen you buy into at least ONE biased report. How do we know that you wouldn't buy into scores of others that support the same failed position. Oh, wait... that would be a slippery slope, wouldn't it? :lol:
Click to expand...

That's what you say. Over and over. But it doesn't make it true or make it stick.

But drive on with it. If that's all you've got, it's all you got.

Maybe it will take your mind off that silly 20 man rubber study you're wishing would go away.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
Good to see you not destroying the "I" on your keyboard tonight. Who says some people never learn?

Things almost always work out well for me, thank you. There is nothing you could say or do to change that. Feel free to try though.
Click to expand...

No, that's already been proven to not be the case.

You haven't shown me to be incorrect on anything. I know it makes you feel good to say otherwise and that's OK. But the fact is, you like most liberals in this thread keep saying some people are incorrect, wrong, or whatever and the only thing you can back it up with is repeating the same or citing some politically correct bogus "study" that many members of the group doing the peer reviews are afraid to comment on freely. The thought police have become that powerful in what used to be respectable organizations.
Click to expand...

Standard conservative-speak. When facts and logic are against you, just make stuff up and see if anyone buys it.

Now, if you want to present yourself as a hack, I can happily show the stupidity of doing so by sarcastically mocking any hack statement you make... like the above. Otherwise, we could discuss this without the hackery. Your choice.

LOL. Now you go and change the rubber study. Just when I was starting to get used to the first one you posted. Did they use more than 20 guys in this new one you posted? I hope so. Using just 20 people in a scientific study should have sounded a little bogus to you to begin with. Why didn't it? Could it be that you didn't think about it, you just wanted to post something thinking nobody would notice how silly a study it was?
Click to expand...

Didn't change it. Just don't have a link to that one.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
You've been discredited by logic and information. Most of your posts in this thread are just you repeating the same refuted position.
Click to expand...
According to you? whoopee. Like that carries any credibility. You are an advocate for same sex marriage and like most, base your argument on emotion not law. The only way you can legitamize it is bastardize the definition of civil rights. The majority of states in the union see through your argument and have banned same sex marriage in their states. So unless you continue the practice of using the judiciary branch as a means of lawfare to push this thing national, I have a sock in my drawer with your name on it. Cheers.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
You are biased because you dismissed my evidence before I even posted it and you had any chance to read it.

You are biased because one poster made a claim that he could post studies and articles to support a point you apparently agree with and you said nothing but when another poster replied that he could post studies refuting those claims you responded to him that anything he would post would be "bogus".

You are biased because while you argue that the evidence for my side is inherently flawed, you have yet to comment regarding the quality of the evidence that the other poster suggested he could offer this debate.

So yeah, you are BIASED!
Click to expand...

Do you ever do any critical thinking?
 
vesper said:
I think people that think like you may be some of the most dangerous to all of us. You over exaggerate on just about everything showing you do not have the potential to be even handed.

You accuse others of stating things they did not to further your argument. I know for a fact that to be the case because you have twisted my words on several occasions. Before you go any further, may I suggest you study the history of homosexuality. And in that study learn WHY in about 324 AD or so governments started creating laws against it. Until then I have a drawer full of socks. I'll let you pick whatever one you want to stick it in the appropriate place.
Click to expand...

They created laws against it because of the spread of Christianity. Not too hard. And as I recall, the Roman empire collapsed after adopting Christianity and banning same sex marriage. What is the lesson?

And let us be clear, a slippery slope argument can work either way. It can be used as an argument for why a change may cause negative consequences or why NOT making a change can lead to negative consequences. That is why using a fallacious argument is generally a bad practice.

The fact is I have been having this debate for years and years and I have yet to hear a coherent, rational argument as to what the harm is to society of allowing same sex couples to marry. The best people can do is baseless conjecture.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
That's what you say. Over and over. But it doesn't make it true or make it stick.

But drive on with it. If that's all you've got, it's all you got.
Click to expand...

I provided the evidence that proved me correct and you wrong. And your response was to run. See, all you are doing is precisely what you are falsely claiming that I'm doing. Making a claim without any evidence or facts. I've backed my positions. You have not.

Maybe it will take your mind off that silly 20 man rubber study you're wishing would go away.
Click to expand...

And my link supports precisely what I said.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, that's already been proven to not be the case.



Standard conservative-speak. When facts and logic are against you, just make stuff up and see if anyone buys it.

Now, if you want to present yourself as a hack, I can happily show the stupidity of doing so by sarcastically mocking any hack statement you make... like the above. Otherwise, we could discuss this without the hackery. Your choice.



Didn't change it. Just don't have a link to that one.
Click to expand...

You keep proving it with each post you make. I'm still here, still doing very well and nothing you have done has got in my way at all.

Standard liberal speak. You've done it to many times to count in this thread. But stick with it, the brain dead types probably get off on it.

No link uh? Damn. I was hoping to find out if that guy in the bar I told you about was included in that study. Whoever did that study probably could have found fault with his rubber use in numerous ways. Would that have skewed that limited 20 man study though?
 
vesper said:
According to you? whoopee. Like that carries any credibility. You are an advocate for same sex marriage and like most, base your argument on emotion not law. The only way you can legitamize it is bastardize the definition of civil rights. The majority of states in the union see through your argument and have banned same sex marriage in their states. So unless you continue the practice of using the judiciary branch as a means of lawfare to push this thing national, I have a sock in my drawer with your name on it. Cheers.
Click to expand...

ROFL. Once people staring using an appeal to the majority fallacy, you know the game is over.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
You keep proving it with each post you make. I'm still here, still doing very well and nothing you have done has got in my way at all.

Standard liberal speak. You've done it to many times to count in this thread. But stick with it, the brain dead types probably get off on it.

No link uh? Damn. I was hoping to find out if that guy in the bar I told you about was included in that study. Whoever did that study probably could have found fault with his rubber use in numerous ways. Would that have skewed that limited 20 man study though?
Click to expand...

First person I ever met who created a straw sample for his strawman.
 
vesper said:
According to you? whoopee. Like that carries any credibility.
Click to expand...

The logic and facts that I present are what carry the credibility... and sink yours.

You are an advocate for same sex marriage and like most, base your argument on emotion not law.
Click to expand...

You advocate against SSM and like most, base your argument on a lack of logic and a lack of substantiation.

The only way you can legitamize it is bastardize the definition of civil rights.
Click to expand...

I pretty much never argue from a civil rights position, so you obviously don't know what you are talking about.

The majority of states in the union see through your argument and have banned same sex marriage in their states.
Click to expand...

And notice how this is changing. As the old, reactionary guard dies off, the newer more enlightened guard takes over.

So unless you continue the practice of using the judiciary branch as a means of lawfare to push this thing national, I have a sock in my drawer with your name on it. Cheers.
Click to expand...

And unless you can actually come up with a legitimate and logical argument that has some substantiation, your socks aren't going anywhere except right back to you.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
You keep proving it with each post you make. I'm still here, still doing very well and nothing you have done has got in my way at all.
Click to expand...

There has been nothing I've done that has gotten in your way of proving your lack of knowledge on this issue. This I agree with.

Standard liberal speak. You've done it to many times to count in this thread. But stick with it, the brain dead types probably get off on it.
Click to expand...

Standard conservative speak. Nothing of substance, nothing of consequence, pretty much nothing at all.

No link uh? Damn. I was hoping to find out if that guy in the bar I told you about was included in that study. Whoever did that study probably could have found fault with his rubber use in numerous ways. Would that have skewed that limited 20 man study though?
Click to expand...

It must've really burned you to have posted that study with a link and everything, only to find out that you posted something that has been shown to be invalid. You still haven't recovered and haven't followed up with one fact since. See, here's the difference. I definitively proved you wrong and proved that you posted something that was invalid. You have not done that.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I provided the evidence that proved me correct and you wrong. And your response was to run. See, all you are doing is precisely what you are falsely claiming that I'm doing. Making a claim without any evidence or facts. I've backed my positions. You have not.



And my link supports precisely what I said.
Click to expand...

What you said?

You mean there was no 20 man rubber study after all? You just made it up? No, say it ain't so. On second thought, maybe you need to provide a link to that 20 man rubber study. That way, we can all peer review it. That way we'll know for sure that the study included 20 men, not 19 and a cross dresser or something. We need to verify the facts of this 20 man rubber study.
 
CriticalThought said:
They created laws against it because of the spread of Christianity. Not too hard. And as I recall, the Roman empire collapsed after adopting Christianity and banning same sex marriage. What is the lesson?

And let us be clear, a slippery slope argument can work either way. It can be used as an argument for why a change may cause negative consequences or why NOT making a change can lead to negative consequences. That is why using a fallacious argument is generally a bad practice.

The fact is I have been having this debate for years and years and I have yet to hear a coherent, rational argument as to what the harm is to society of allowing same sex couples to marry. The best people can do is baseless conjecture.
Click to expand...
I suggest you learn from history. In ancient times homosexuality along with bestiality , incest, polygamy were practiced. There are reasons why these things were found to be detrimental to society and stopped. When you do that you may have a better understanding.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
What you said?

You mean there was no 20 man rubber study after all? You just made it up? No, say it ain't so. On second thought, maybe you need to provide a link to that 20 man rubber study. That way, we can all peer review it. That way we'll know for sure that the study included 20 men, not 19 and a cross dresser or something. We need to verify the facts of this 20 man rubber study.
Click to expand...

I know, I know. It's hard to pay attention and stay focused when you are being beaten so badly and you keep fumbling over the fact that logic and information is devoid from your side. But see, I always find it invigorating to help those who are inept at debate become better. However, I don't like to do the work for them... they must learn. So, with that in mind, let me assist you in learning how to follow a debate and how that debate originates and progresses. Now, I'm not going to do the work for you. You're going to have to do it. So, let's start here... tell me how the entire discussion on condom use started, what your position was and what my position was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom