How To Explain Gay Rights To An Idiot

Damocles said:
In what way have you suddenly desanctified your marriage since gays have been allowed to marry in many nations and even some states in this union?

Remember, the only way it can be sanctified is through your actions (going to church and being "joined" per God's will, "what God has joined together, let no man put asunder"), and the only way it can be "de" sanctified is through you, or your wife's actions. (Seeking divorce, sleeping around, etc.).

What other people do has no effect on your marriage, only theirs.
Click to expand...

It's not my marriage that is the issue, but the institution of it.
 
Onceler said:
Nah - it's just something bigots have done for year. Try to equate equivalency where none exists.

And guess what? It fails every time.
Click to expand...
Liberalism is what's failing. That, and calling people names like "bigot" when you disagree with them.
 
DamnYankee said:
That's not what I said. Nice straw man though.
Click to expand...

It's not a strawman. If that's not what you believe, then your position is inconsistent.

This is no great surprise. You don't really have strong feelings about protecting the "sanctity of marriage." You really just hate gay people.
 
Damocles said:
But we do allow them to get married. Unlike driving their marriage cannot kill you, does not hurt you, and can do nothing to "desanctify" anything at all.

I've noticed that since gay people have been getting married, the world has not collapsed onto itself and your marriage is still sanctified as much as you believe it was before. Nothing at all has happened to you and yours.
Click to expand...

since gay people have been getting married,????

IF homos HAVE BEEN GETTING MARRIED, then wt hell is this thread all about ?

You see, its not that they want to get married and live happily ever after....what they want is for the "normal" population to condone and accept them......

ask Poet......is that the whole goal of homos and marriage ? Poet wants us to forget that homosexuality is a mental disorder....he wants us all to accept nuts like Chaz Bono as a man........cross dressers as totally sane, etc......


 
Onceler said:
It's not a strawman. If that's not what you believe, then your position is inconsistent.

This is no great surprise. You don't really have strong feelings about protecting the "sanctity of marriage." You really just hate gay people.
Click to expand...

What you're trying to do is say that since X is a contributing factor to damaging the institution of marriage, that we should also do Y, even though its obvious that Y would also damage it.

With your second sentence I can be silly as you and mock you: You don't really have strong feelings about protecting gay people. You really just hate the sanctity of marriage.
 
Onceler said:
That's interesting. By divorcing, you don't think they're affecting the "sanctity of marriage?"
Click to expand...


What is the "sanctity of marriage?"....whats it mean ?
Does it have something to do with Catholics calling it a 'sacrament' ?

I won't know who or why used that phase first, but the lefties have latched onto it like it was gold.....

and yes....it is a strawman
 
DamnYankee said:
What you're trying to do is say that since X is a contributing factor to damaging the institution of marriage, that we should also do Y, even though its obvious that Y would also damage it.

With your second sentence I can be silly as you and mock you: You don't really have strong feelings about protecting gay people. You really just hate the sanctity of marriage.
Click to expand...

Was that mocking me? It just sounds like your usual dopey stuff to me.

I'm just saying your position is inconsistent. If your reason for not allowing gays to marry is to protect the "sanctity," it's inconsistent to support divorced people getting married again.

That's all.
 
bravo said:
What is the "sanctity of marriage?"....whats it mean ?
Does it have something to do with Catholics calling it a 'sacrament' ?

I won't know who or why used that phase first, but the lefties have latched onto it like it was gold.....

and yes....it is a strawman
Click to expand...

Hey, idjit - it isn't the left who talks about the "sanctity of marriage" and the need to protect it by keeping homosexuals from getting married.
 
bravo said:
What is the "sanctity of marriage?"....whats it mean ?
Does it have something to do with Catholics calling it a 'sacrament' ?

I won't know who or why used that phase first, but the lefties have latched onto it like it was gold.....

and yes....it is a strawman
Click to expand...
The lefties are trying to steer this into the religions realm, so they can then cite separation of church and state. Once gay marriage is legal then the lefties will drop the church-state stance and force religion to recognize it and perform the ceremonies.

My argument is that the institution of marriage benefits society and that the legal union between a man and his woman is therefore sanctioned by the state.
 
Last edited:
Onceler said:
Was that mocking me? It just sounds like your usual dopey stuff to me.

I'm just saying your position is inconsistent. If your reason for not allowing gays to marry is to protect the "sanctity," it's inconsistent to support divorced people getting married again.

That's all.
Click to expand...

Except it is consistent for the reasons stated. I don't care that people get remarried because that's better than the alternative. I do care that the sanctity of marriage has gotten corrupted to the point that people don't take marriage as seriously as they should. They marry without considering it as a life commitment and get divorced without working out the problems in their marriages. That's no reason for chipping away at the sanctity of marriage further.
 
DamnYankee said:
Collapsed, no. But has it benefited society?
Click to expand...

Can you prove it has "destroyed" or "hurt" society in any way? So far, there is no evidence of that. It's icky... but so is a bunch of crap people do.

Government should be limited in any action until and if you can find actual victims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top