[W:3596] Arguments Against Same-Sex Marriage

[Lursa]

Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. Haven't you noticed that almost every SCOTUS ruling on the matter mentioned it?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-556_3204.pdf
The right of same-sex couples to marry is also derived from
the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection. The Due
Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause are connected in a
profound way. Rights implicit in liberty and rights secured by equal
protection may rest on different precepts and are not always coextensive, yet each may be instructive as to the meaning and reach of
the other.

Yes, I have. For years.

But that it was not obvious from your terse response if you did.

 

[CLAX1911]

Yes, but I did not know you were married.

so now you realize that you were talking about my MARRIAGE?

Anyway, I just realized how hurtful my last sentence was. I want to take it back. I like you as a poster, Clax.

It's water under the bridge. And also keep in mind I'm a big boy, and things people say on the internet I don't typically find hurtful or offencive in any way.

As to the question you asked I would simply allow you to wonder.

 

[Wan]

One more thing:

If I can say I am grossed out by gays, then people can also say they are grossed out by Asians (I am Asian). This is only fair. Furthermore, we Asians rank lower than gays on the totem pole.

 

[Wan]

It's water under the bridge. And also keep in mind I'm a big boy, and things people say on the internet I don't typically find hurtful or offencive in any way.

I am glad to hear this. I feel the same, too.

As to the question you asked I would simply allow you to wonder.

Clax is shrouded in mystery.

 

[CLAX1911]

I am glad to hear this. I feel the same, too.

Clax is shrouded in mystery.

I think it's strange how many people that are supposedly not interested in my sex life ask me that question. Out of all my really close friends only one has ever asked me.

 

[AGENT J]

One more thing:

If I can say I am grossed out by gays, then people can also say they are grossed out by Asians (I am Asian). This is only fair. Furthermore, we Asians rank lower than gays on the totem pole.

LMAO holy **** i gotta hear this . . .

exactly how do Asians rank lower than gays on the totem pole?

 

[Logician Man]

LMAO holy **** i gotta hear this . . .

exactly how do Asians rank lower than gays on the totem pole?

In general, the average Asian is shorter than the average gay...hence they tend to be near the lower end of totem poles ? :lol:

 

[Divine_Wind]

Yes, I have. For years.

But that it was not obvious from your terse response if you did.

Seemed pretty straightforward to me:

If there is no difference in rights and benefits between "marriage" and "civil union", then I agree. It's just a name people can call anything they like. The problem, however, was that "civil unions" were only recognized at the state level thus still being a 14th Amendment issue at the Federal level.

What part of the 14th Amendment did you think I was referencing in this case? Don't you know that the SCOTUS rulings have involved both the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses on the matter?

 

[Quag]

I guess I missed it but it's nice to see that it's pretty obvious to others too...but strong bias tends to put blinders on people. They miss reality, truth.

Guess im bored but I went back and found it, post 264. You actually gave it a like

 

[Quag]

One more thing:

If I can say I am grossed out by gays, then people can also say they are grossed out by Asians (I am Asian). This is only fair. Furthermore, we Asians rank lower than gays on the totem pole.

I have no idea what totem pole you have all these people on but just curious where are gay Asians on it?

 

[Quag]

In general, the average Asian is shorter than the average gay...hence they tend to be near the lower end of totem poles ? :lol:

Again begs the question about gay Asians

 

[AGENT J]

In general, the average Asian is shorter than the average gay...hence they tend to be near the lower end of totem poles ? :lol:

LOL thats about the only way

 

[Lursa]

Seemed pretty straightforward to me:



What part of the 14th Amendment did you think I was referencing in this case? Don't you know that the SCOTUS rulings have involved both the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses on the matter?

Since I questioned "Constitutional right"...14th Amendment is not an answer. If you choose to be terse, either accept questions for clarity or move on.

I am very familiar with the 14th.

 

[JasperL]

Except I never disputed any of this. Nor did I say I want to deny gay couples right. I was merely pointing out that when you said, paraphrased, that this whole issue is just gays choosing to use a word in a certain way, you are in fact wrong.

OK, I'll quit because you cannot take an actual defensible position. Canada passing SSM "saddens" you 15 years later but you won't say why. You want them to have rights, but you're hung up on the word "marriage" for some silly reason, but if that's your only problem with the "real world consequences" of SSM, that's fine. As I said, on a list of 1,000 things to worry about, what gay people call their unions isn't on my list - couldn't possibly care less.

Not sure what you are saying. Anyway, my point is that you seemed to reject Dixon's observation strictly on the grounds of him being straight.

Well, I didn't, so that's a relief for you I'm sure. I rejected it because anecdote =/= evidence, and that's especially true of anecdotal information from a straight guy who is merely "acquainted" with a very few actual gay people.

 

[Wan]

OK, I'll quit because you cannot take an actual defensible position. Canada passing SSM "saddens" you 15 years later but you won't say why.

It was not meant to be taken seriously. Just a smart-a** post on my part.

Well, I didn't, so that's a relief for you I'm sure. I rejected it because anecdote =/= evidence, and that's especially true of anecdotal information from a straight guy who is merely "acquainted" with a very few actual gay people.

But you have no problem with accepting gay people's anecdotes. And you believe what they say based solely on the strength of their being gay.

 

[Lursa]

But you have no problem with accepting gay people's anecdotes. And you believe what they say based solely on the strength of their being gay.

So then all the straight people that claim they were born straight shouldnt be believed either, correct? Based on your statement (bolded).

If not, please explain the difference?

 

[JasperL]

It was not meant to be taken seriously. Just a smart-a** post on my part.

But you have no problem with accepting gay people's anecdotes. And you believe what they say based solely on the strength of their being gay.

You are wrong as usual. So I guess you earn a gold star of sorts for being consistently wrong at least. Congrats!

 

[Wan]

You are wrong as usual. So I guess you earn a gold star of sorts for being consistently wrong at least. Congrats!

Consistency is under-rated.

 

[grip]

Consistency is under-rated.

It's actually overrated, especially concerning doing crazy things over and over expecting different results.

 

[Divine_Wind]

Since I questioned "Constitutional right"...14th Amendment is not an answer. If you choose to be terse, either accept questions for clarity or move on.

I am very familiar with the 14th.

If that were true then you should have understood the 14th Amendment rights and their application to this discussion.

 

[Lursa]

If that were true then you should have understood the 14th Amendment rights and their application to this discussion.

I do, but from your terse response, the post was no longer connected to the one discussing the 14th.

"A Constitutional right" does not equal "the 14th Amendment" and it may surprise you (but not others) to realize that time and more important things interceded between reading your posts.

You might keep that in mind in the future...poor communication skills inhibit discussion.

 

[CLAX1911]

In general, the average Asian is shorter than the average gay...hence they tend to be near the lower end of totem poles ? :lol:

What about gay Asians?

 

[Logician Man]

What about gay Asians?

Maybe they set the poles, Clax ?

 

[dixon01767]

Yes, more than 300 posts in.

The quotes with the arrows was helpful.THe 2nd was esp. so, since you distinctly called out what began our initial conversation on closely related couples marrying.



That's not about discrimination against all not receiving marriage benefits...

Yeah, thats the part that was in the first half of my post that you took the time to edit out so you could pretend you had a relevant point.

 

[dixon01767]

"That would be a good argument that any two consenting adults should be able to marry. Instead they only extended marriage to gays, because its not about equality and is instead inequality by design for the benefit of gays."

Yes, of course by that twisted definition, anything involving "marriage" recognized by the state is about the "inequality" of married couples versus straight couples. .

Tell that to those who so vehemently deny it.

The only option for perfect "equality" with regard to "marriage" is to dissolve all marriages for purposes of the state

That wouldnt do anything to win more "respect and dignity" for gays which is what gay marriage is all about.