Define a 'Liberal' or a 'Conservative'

[Cancel 2018. 3]

That's a reason to make marriage stronger, not weaker.

how do you propose to make marriage stronger? by not allowing couples to marry?

 

[DamnYankee]

how do you propose to make marriage stronger? by not allowing couples to marry?

That's not my argument. Mine is to not make marriage weaker.

 

[Jarod]

That's a reason to make marriage stronger, not weaker.

And allowing truely commited couples to get married makes it weaker how?

 

[DamnYankee]

And allowing truely commited couples to get married makes it weaker how?

By attacking traditional marriage.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

That's not my argument. Mine is to not make marriage weaker.

how does it make marriage weaker? it brings into the fold those who would otherwise not marry, but live as if they are married. it also could bring into the fold those who fool around because they can't get married and possibly straighten up when they get married like many heterosexual people.

marriage is a contract in this country. religion has no part in the law of marriage.

 

[DamnYankee]

how does it make marriage weaker?

It changes the traditional definition.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

A liberal is one who encourages free thought and creativity in himself and others. A conservative is one who wishes to 'conserve' the status quo and finds ceative progress difficult.

So far that's the only honest answer posted and one I agree with.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

It changes the traditional definition.

You didn't answer his question.

 

[Jarod]

By attacking traditional marriage.

By "traditional" are you referencing marriage of biblical times? Are you talking bigamy?

 

[Jarod]

Expanding the boundries of something is not necessarly attacking it.

 

[WinterBorn]

Because the state has a compelling interest to recognize traditional marriage, since it is the backbone of the family, which is the backbone of a civil society.

And two men or two women, in a loving long-term relationship cannot provide the same benefits to society as a family?

 

[DamnYankee]

You didn't answer his question.

Yes I did.

 

[WinterBorn]

What compelling interest is that?

Are you suggesting that gay couples somehow deteriorate other peoples families by getting 'married'? Are straight couples THAT fragile that a gay couple getting married would destroy them?

SM has suggested, in prior threads about gays, that acceptance of gays would result in more people "turning" gay. Amusing as that is, it explains his fear.

 

[DamnYankee]

By "traditional" are you referencing marriage of biblical times? Are you talking bigamy?

No I'm referencing the definition that has been refined over a period of 5000 years to its current state.

 

[DamnYankee]

I have no fear. You're full of shit as usual.

 

[Crashk]

Liberals will spend your money. Conservatives will keep it for themselves.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

It changes the traditional definition.

since government was not traditionally a democracy, we should never have formed one as it would weaken the traditional definition.

 

[DamnYankee]

since government was not traditionally a democracy, we should never have formed one as it would weaken the traditional definition.

We don't have a democracy Yurt, we have a republican form of government.

 

[Crashk]

Conservatives are against gay marriage not on moral grounds but on monetary grounds. Face it, conservative leaders use religion to create divisions and hate, their real religion is money. Cons don't want gays sharing insurance, property, tax breaks, inheritance and on and on.

 

[WinterBorn]

There have been traditions that oppressed people for thousands of years. We changed most of them and we will get this one too.

BTW, Argumentum ad antiquitatem (the argument to antiquity or tradition). If you are going to shoot down other people's arguments based on logical fallacies, you really should avoid them in your arguments.