Rinse, repeat, texmaster. You still don't understand the debate, how to debate, or how badly you are failing at this. I'm sure that you will remain uneducatable on any of these factors, but continuing to demonstrate how poorly you have done here, amuses me, so I will do so again.
Look at all those facts. Still up to the same old games I see.
Still can't grasp the understanding of this.
I understand how the Constitution works. I understand we have our own laws and I understand how stupid it would be to look to other countries to write our own laws considering the broad spectrum of opinion out there.
You simply can't understand that.
Not what I said. You didn't understand the argument... as usual. Re-read what I said and try again.
Try not to stand so close to the microwave. Perhaps it will help.
Try reading what is read and actually trying to understand the debate. It might help.
That like many of your points makes no sense. It is not up to me to prove it should stay that way. Once again you fail miserably on not only how to debate but how laws get changed. It is up to YOU to bring forth the argument.
But you've never understood this up to this point so I'm not hopeful you will understand it now.
You still don't understand your error. Your argument makes no sense. Just because something has always been done a particular way is no PROOF that it is good. See, because of my destruction of your logic, YOU HAVE PROVEN NOTHING. I, however, have proven that they are equal. Me, 1, you, nothing.
hahahhahaha Now you've fallen into the race and gender argument. So typical of pro gay marriage argument. Once again, race and gender is scientifically proven to be genetic, gay marriage IS NOT. You might as well compare hair color to hair styles :rofl
As usual, you missed the concept of what I was saying. I demonstrated how illogical your position is. Nothing to do with genetics. Choose hair styles. If people with curly hair styles have never been allowed to vote, does that make it
right? NO...all it does it make it law. But, we are not discussing law, here. We are discussing logic... of which you have none. Let's see if you understand what I just said. I doubt it.
Still running away from the argument I see.
Still don't understand the argument I see.
LOL So if I find a country that executes gays because they claim its deviant behavior then gays are deviant.
If there is
evidence to support their claim that gays are deviant, then the claim should be considered. See how logic works?
My God the stupidity of what you are saying is beyond words. You can't even grasp the other side of the coin can you?
Of course I can. You, however, have demonstrated no ability to see the other side of the issue, or to understand the issue at all.
Thats a bald face lie and I challenge you to provide the exact quote where I made that claim. Sloppy debating when you can't even remember whom you are debating.
Here's the sequence:
2. Ignoring the countries that have legalized same sex marriage and making a fallacious argument that it would be somehow harmful to this country.
Your response:
Lesson #2 Laws passed in other countries are inconsequential since we do not live under a world government.
If this is NOT what you meant, you need to be more clear. Either you meant what I presented, or you are again going with the legal argument... irrelevant to this discussion. Either way, you lose.
No, we are not. Check the OP of this thread. Its incredible you can't even follow basic sentence structure.
Yeah we are...the thread has drifted to the issue I described. It's incredible you can't follow a simple conversation.
LOL This coming from the guy who just said we should follow what other counrtries do on gay marriage as long as it perscribes to your train of thought.
"Bald faced lie". Quote where I said that. I have not argued legalities at all, so you're not going to find it. I accept your apology in advance.
Again, another bald faced lie. I never EVER made that statement. Your sloppyness and poor attnetion to detail strikes again.
You're right. You just confirmed it with your response. See above.
Actually you need to try and stay focused on who you are debating. You've obviously gotten sloppy in your responses.
Not at all. You need to try to actually understand what we are debating.
I'm not the one trying to label your arguments then running away claiming the label obfuscates you from debating the point. Thats your side.
You're the one making completely illogical arguments. It would be nice if you actually had some substance of which to discuss.
Are we back in forth grade now? Whats next? Are you going to try and steal my pencils? Amazing how immature you get when you are challenged.
Just responding to your immature, snarky comment. Can't take it? Don't do it.
You can't even grasp the OP can you? This is a debate about changing the LAW. Not a philosophical debate on your feelings about gay marriage. Its about supporting an argument to change the law. But since you can't do that you try and change the argument to a philosophical one because you think you can live in the world of theory and proclaim victory without evidence. Sorry sport, it doesn't work that way.
Please... this thread has morphed from the OP long ago. This is how conversation works. But even with that, I have clearly shown both through evidence and logic how it would be appropriate to change the law. You have demonstrated nothing but logical fallacies to support your position. In other words, you've got NOTHING.
You've explained this opinion of yours yes.
It is factual, something that you have completely failed in refuting.
There are unsupervised questionaires not evidence.
Incorrect, but since you don't understand research methodology, I don't expect you to get it.
Back that fantasy up about polygamy not being able to raise healthy children. 1/4 of all countries have polygamy so once again this is another uneducated and ignorant statement made by a desperate individual seeing his arguments fall down like a house of cards under any real scrutiny. You are once again pulling facts from the lower end of your back and as usual with nothing to support them. Besides, since you are still having trouble with paying attention to detail, the argument was based on the right to marry, not the ability to raise children. I wish you would actually pay attention to detail. It would clear things up far quicker and I wouldn't have to draw it in crayon for you over and over again.
Wait...
YOU'RE basing your refutation on evidence from other countries?!!! :lol::lol::lol: You are a walking, talking contradiction. Further, you have presented nothing to disprove what I said. And lastly, believing that the argument is about the right to marry is oversimplifying a complex issue... not surprising for you. One must explore WHY folks would have the right to marry. THAT'S what this debate is about. The fact that you don't know that is why you've failed at it.
Yes, IT DOES. I ask you again, what other explanation is there? Immaculate Conception? :rofl You can't even support these ignorant theories of yours.
No it does not. Procreation is irrelevant to sexual orienation. A gay person can procreate, biologically... and often does. Yet, they are still gay. There... logic. Procreation is irrelevant to sexual orientation.
LOL Which again does not make it genetic because it appears in history any more than cannibilism is genetic because it appears in history.
Heterosexuality is a BIOLOGICAL REQUIREMENT FOR PROCREATION. ITS A PROVEN FACT. You have NOTHING to support a biological or genetic argument for homosexuality AT ALL. That is why you continue to loose this argument over and over again. Frankly, its getting pretty sad watching you try to peddle this ignorance without a shred of evidence to support you over and over again.
And you continue tio lose because you still do not understand the difference between sexual orientation and sexual behavior. A gay person can procreate. Yet, they can still be gay. No absolute connection between sexual orientation and sexual behavior, and procreatio is irrelevant to sexual behavior. Simple logic. Your lack of it is why your position is an absolute nothing.