The trick is to never ask a question that you don't already know the answer to.
Um, for a lawyer with a witness on the stand, this might be true; but in general, it's completely wrong... if you ever wish to learn anything that is. If scientists never asked questions they didn't know the answers to, we'd be back in the Stone Age (or before, even). If explorers never asked questions about the world, there'd be no New World (and this includes the Vikings and whoever came over on the land bridge). If children never raised their hands in school, they'd remain ignorant forever. Asking questions is the key to an attitude of discovery. Only people with closed minds constrain themselves to only asking questions they know the answers to.
Absolutely not! There is no equality between a marriage between one man and one woman, and a marriage of same sex partners. Just because you're confused about the differences between the sexes does not mean that everyone else is. No, no, no! My vote has been cast.
I like the cut of jib. So much so that I want to rub my penis all over your face and ejaculate my gooey manlove. Swallow. You know you want to.
Really, then tell me Einstein, why is it on the ballot? Hmmmmmmmm? Who is trying to change society to accept aberrant behavior as being normal? Every argument that you put forth can be used to let people marry animals, or to promote polygamy. We don't need to conform, you do!
I'm not entirely sure how many times someone has to explain to you that most who realise there's nothing wrong with gay marriage do so because it involves consenting adults and does no harm to any third party.
Bestiality on the other hand involves an animal which does not have the capacity to consent, or at best the capacity to adequately express consent. The assumption must therefore be that the animal in question is harmed and therefore the action is not acceptable.
Whether polygamy should be accepted or not is debatable. If all involved are consenting adults, I fail to see the harm that this could cause other people. I guess that it's likely that the relationship would be unstable and more likely to fail than one between two people; if they had children then it could lead to the harm thereof.
The only reason that gay marriage is legal in California, after the people voted against it, is because activist judges legislated it from the bench, bypassing the will of the people. This current proposition will put things back the way they were before the judges exceeded their positions.
The criticism, I think, was not directed at a misunderstanding of how the current state of affairs came into existence.
Rather, the criticism was directed at your assertion that you were opposed to the potential harm that might come about if same-sex marriage were ever recognized.
This is a fallacious statement because it ignores the fact that, because same-sex marriages are already being given legal recognition, any such harm, if it exists, ought to be a present, observable phenomenon rather than being expressed in terms of the hypothetical, future-tense.
[sarcasm]
Being opposed to the hypothetical, but as-yet unobserved consequences of a dangerous activity is something that I'd expect of the leftist, tree-hugging, granola-munching environmentalists about the potential harm of CO2 and global warming.
Absolutely not! There is no equality between a marriage between one man and one woman, and a marriage of same sex partners. Just because you're confused about the differences between the sexes does not mean that everyone else is. No, no, no! My vote has been cast.
I am in no way confused. You seem to be confused. I'm not debating the differences between the sexes (nor the genders...and yes, there is a big difference between sex and gender). I am simply saying equality in recognition under the law is at the core of America's existence. We are the world?s most advanced nation (in our opinion) yet we do not grant the same types of equality that are currently granted in the rest of the world. That is a problem. Gay marriage is already legal in CA and there is been no harm and no change to the way of living for straight families. Gay marriage will not be taught in schools. Gay marriage does not change much of anything. Churches will not be forced to recognize it, etc. The only difference is these couples will receive the same basic rights as straight couples (tax benefits, visitation of spouses and children in the hospital, etc).
And like I said before, if you don?t want to legalize it, then fine. But then taxing these couples at the same rates without providing the same liberties and benefits of being American, is 100% anti-American and goes against the very reason our nation was founded.
And like I said before, if you don?t want to legalize it, then fine. But then taxing these couples at the same rates without providing the same liberties and benefits of being American, is 100% anti-American and goes against the very reason our nation was founded.
I'm single and I pay MUCH more taxes than a married couple. Where's my 'benefits'? I'm not complaining. That's just the way it is. Married couples get a tax break, in large part because kids are expensive. But a man and a woman having kids is the genetic cornerstone of our existence.
My brother is gay, and he and his partner both work. They have plenty of money for their selfish lives and can afford to go out for fine dinners every night and go on gay Disney cruises. They don't need a break. If they had one, they would just be all the more self-indulgent. And their relationship doesn't need to be legitimized by allowing it to be called 'marriage'.
I'm single and I pay MUCH more taxes than a married couple. Where's my 'benefits'? I'm not complaining. That's just the way it is. Married couples get a tax break, in large part because kids are expensive. But a man and a woman having kids is the genetic cornerstone of our existence.
My brother is gay, and he and his partner both work. They have plenty of money for their selfish lives and can afford to go out for fine dinners every night and go on gay Disney cruises. They don't need a break. If they had one, they would just be all the more self-indulgent. And their relationship doesn't need to be legitimized by allowing it to be called 'marriage'.
Yeah I agree, and if heterosexual couples CHOSE to remain "selfishly childless" they should be made to pay their fair share eh? It's against nature.
What about infertile couples. They should pay the full amount too!
No way should the sterile be subsidized by the rest of us.
Yeah I agree, and if heterosexual couples CHOSE to remain "selfishly childless" they should be made to pay their fair share eh? It's against nature.
What about infertile couples. They should pay the full amount too!
No way should the sterile be subsidized by the rest of us.
C.
For the purposes of this thread, you are not part of "the rest of us", since you pay no taxes in California, or Arizona, or anywhere else in the US. To put a finer point on it, you have no dog in this fight.
I'm single and I pay MUCH more taxes than a married couple. Where's my 'benefits'? I'm not complaining. That's just the way it is. Married couples get a tax break, in large part because kids are expensive. But a man and a woman having kids is the genetic cornerstone of our existence.
My brother is gay, and he and his partner both work. They have plenty of money for their selfish lives and can afford to go out for fine dinners every night and go on gay Disney cruises. They don't need a break. If they had one, they would just be all the more self-indulgent. And their relationship doesn't need to be legitimized by allowing it to be called 'marriage'.
Suppose the two of them decided to marry and at some point were to want to raise children,especially adopted kids,that could be helping humans genetically too.You seem to discount all the couples who get married knowing that they'll be adopting or relying on test tube babies for their families.
Suppose the two of them decided to marry and at some point were to want to raise children,especially adopted kids,that could be helping humans genetically too.You seem to discount all the couples who get married knowing that they'll be adopting or relying on test tube babies for their families.
Of course, the gay community is famous for adding to the gene pool, and insuring the survival of mankind. What a load of crap.
Of course, the gay community is famous for adding to the gene pool, and insuring the survival of mankind. What a load of crap.
Over 6 Billion and climbing guarantees that the lack of gene contributions from the Gay Communities aren't adversely accelerating the demise of the Human Species. We've got enough dysfunctional and physically stunted Heterosexuals amongst us non-gays to ensure the Human Species not only surives but grows ever uglier, with each successive generation.
Californians already voted to ban gay marriage, years ago. So hear we are again wasting more money on an issue that the people of california have already voted on, just because some lame SF judges feel the need to define marriage.
Namndal - Do come to the US! And please, I hope you understand that most Americans, especially on the east and west coast, are not like Zinfella or any of the other nutters on display in this forum. These are just internet trolls. Truly.
I love how every time you are unable to defend your position, you resort to making this same statement. Good stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinfella
For the purposes of this thread, you are not part of "the rest of us", since you pay no taxes in California, or Arizona, or anywhere else in the US. To put a finer point on it, you have no dog in this fight.
Namndal - Do come to the US! And please, I hope you understand that most Americans, especially on the east and west coast, are not like Zinfella or any of the other nutters on display in this forum. These are just internet trolls. Truly.
Thanks!
I know all Americans are not the same, and I would love to see the land between the coasts also.
I know all Americans are not the same, and I would love to see the land between the coasts also.
And the thread keeps going! While you are visiting you can go to zinfella and frugality's wedding. Rumor has it they're getting hitched. Very sweet. Separate rooms mind you, to keep temptation at bay!
PS - No comment please, zinfella honey, you already voted.
Namndal - Do come to the US! And please, I hope you understand that most Americans, especially on the east and west coast, are not like Zinfella or any of the other nutters on display in this forum. These are just internet trolls. Truly.
And your source for that is? Actually, you have no source, as the majority of American people have already voted against gay marriage. Check out the states that ban it, and don't forget to add California and Arizona, come next Tuesday.
Comments
I'll bid you good night.
Good night, dear
The trick is to never ask a question that you don't already know the answer to.
Um, for a lawyer with a witness on the stand, this might be true; but in general, it's completely wrong... if you ever wish to learn anything that is. If scientists never asked questions they didn't know the answers to, we'd be back in the Stone Age (or before, even). If explorers never asked questions about the world, there'd be no New World (and this includes the Vikings and whoever came over on the land bridge). If children never raised their hands in school, they'd remain ignorant forever. Asking questions is the key to an attitude of discovery. Only people with closed minds constrain themselves to only asking questions they know the answers to.
Absolutely not! There is no equality between a marriage between one man and one woman, and a marriage of same sex partners. Just because you're confused about the differences between the sexes does not mean that everyone else is. No, no, no! My vote has been cast.
I like the cut of jib. So much so that I want to rub my penis all over your face and ejaculate my gooey manlove. Swallow. You know you want to.
Really, then tell me Einstein, why is it on the ballot? Hmmmmmmmm? Who is trying to change society to accept aberrant behavior as being normal? Every argument that you put forth can be used to let people marry animals, or to promote polygamy. We don't need to conform, you do!
I'm not entirely sure how many times someone has to explain to you that most who realise there's nothing wrong with gay marriage do so because it involves consenting adults and does no harm to any third party.
Bestiality on the other hand involves an animal which does not have the capacity to consent, or at best the capacity to adequately express consent. The assumption must therefore be that the animal in question is harmed and therefore the action is not acceptable.
Whether polygamy should be accepted or not is debatable. If all involved are consenting adults, I fail to see the harm that this could cause other people. I guess that it's likely that the relationship would be unstable and more likely to fail than one between two people; if they had children then it could lead to the harm thereof.
The only reason that gay marriage is legal in California, after the people voted against it, is because activist judges legislated it from the bench, bypassing the will of the people. This current proposition will put things back the way they were before the judges exceeded their positions.
The criticism, I think, was not directed at a misunderstanding of how the current state of affairs came into existence.
Rather, the criticism was directed at your assertion that you were opposed to the potential harm that might come about if same-sex marriage were ever recognized.
This is a fallacious statement because it ignores the fact that, because same-sex marriages are already being given legal recognition, any such harm, if it exists, ought to be a present, observable phenomenon rather than being expressed in terms of the hypothetical, future-tense.
[sarcasm]
Being opposed to the hypothetical, but as-yet unobserved consequences of a dangerous activity is something that I'd expect of the leftist, tree-hugging, granola-munching environmentalists about the potential harm of CO2 and global warming.
[/sarcasm]
Absolutely not! There is no equality between a marriage between one man and one woman, and a marriage of same sex partners. Just because you're confused about the differences between the sexes does not mean that everyone else is. No, no, no! My vote has been cast.
I am in no way confused. You seem to be confused. I'm not debating the differences between the sexes (nor the genders...and yes, there is a big difference between sex and gender). I am simply saying equality in recognition under the law is at the core of America's existence. We are the world?s most advanced nation (in our opinion) yet we do not grant the same types of equality that are currently granted in the rest of the world. That is a problem. Gay marriage is already legal in CA and there is been no harm and no change to the way of living for straight families. Gay marriage will not be taught in schools. Gay marriage does not change much of anything. Churches will not be forced to recognize it, etc. The only difference is these couples will receive the same basic rights as straight couples (tax benefits, visitation of spouses and children in the hospital, etc).
And like I said before, if you don?t want to legalize it, then fine. But then taxing these couples at the same rates without providing the same liberties and benefits of being American, is 100% anti-American and goes against the very reason our nation was founded.
And like I said before, if you don?t want to legalize it, then fine. But then taxing these couples at the same rates without providing the same liberties and benefits of being American, is 100% anti-American and goes against the very reason our nation was founded.
I'm single and I pay MUCH more taxes than a married couple. Where's my 'benefits'? I'm not complaining. That's just the way it is. Married couples get a tax break, in large part because kids are expensive. But a man and a woman having kids is the genetic cornerstone of our existence.
My brother is gay, and he and his partner both work. They have plenty of money for their selfish lives and can afford to go out for fine dinners every night and go on gay Disney cruises. They don't need a break. If they had one, they would just be all the more self-indulgent. And their relationship doesn't need to be legitimized by allowing it to be called 'marriage'.
I'm single and I pay MUCH more taxes than a married couple. Where's my 'benefits'? I'm not complaining. That's just the way it is. Married couples get a tax break, in large part because kids are expensive. But a man and a woman having kids is the genetic cornerstone of our existence.
My brother is gay, and he and his partner both work. They have plenty of money for their selfish lives and can afford to go out for fine dinners every night and go on gay Disney cruises. They don't need a break. If they had one, they would just be all the more self-indulgent. And their relationship doesn't need to be legitimized by allowing it to be called 'marriage'.
Yeah I agree, and if heterosexual couples CHOSE to remain "selfishly childless" they should be made to pay their fair share eh? It's against nature.
What about infertile couples. They should pay the full amount too!
No way should the sterile be subsidized by the rest of us.
C.
Yeah I agree, and if heterosexual couples CHOSE to remain "selfishly childless" they should be made to pay their fair share eh? It's against nature.
What about infertile couples. They should pay the full amount too!
No way should the sterile be subsidized by the rest of us.
C.
For the purposes of this thread, you are not part of "the rest of us", since you pay no taxes in California, or Arizona, or anywhere else in the US. To put a finer point on it, you have no dog in this fight.
I'm single and I pay MUCH more taxes than a married couple. Where's my 'benefits'? I'm not complaining. That's just the way it is. Married couples get a tax break, in large part because kids are expensive. But a man and a woman having kids is the genetic cornerstone of our existence.
My brother is gay, and he and his partner both work. They have plenty of money for their selfish lives and can afford to go out for fine dinners every night and go on gay Disney cruises. They don't need a break. If they had one, they would just be all the more self-indulgent. And their relationship doesn't need to be legitimized by allowing it to be called 'marriage'.
Suppose the two of them decided to marry and at some point were to want to raise children,especially adopted kids,that could be helping humans genetically too.You seem to discount all the couples who get married knowing that they'll be adopting or relying on test tube babies for their families.
Suppose the two of them decided to marry and at some point were to want to raise children,especially adopted kids,that could be helping humans genetically too.You seem to discount all the couples who get married knowing that they'll be adopting or relying on test tube babies for their families.
Of course, the gay community is famous for adding to the gene pool, and insuring the survival of mankind. What a load of crap.
Of course, the gay community is famous for adding to the gene pool, and insuring the survival of mankind. What a load of crap.
Over 6 Billion and climbing guarantees that the lack of gene contributions from the Gay Communities aren't adversely accelerating the demise of the Human Species. We've got enough dysfunctional and physically stunted Heterosexuals amongst us non-gays to ensure the Human Species not only surives but grows ever uglier, with each successive generation.
For the purposes of this thread, you are not part of "the rest of us", since you pay no taxes in California, or Arizona, or anywhere else in the US. To put a finer point on it, you have no dog in this fight.
Of course, the gay community is famous for adding to the gene pool, and insuring the survival of mankind. What a load of crap.
No, I think the Chinese are most famous for that. You should write them a thank you note.
Namndal - Do come to the US! And please, I hope you understand that most Americans, especially on the east and west coast, are not like Zinfella or any of the other nutters on display in this forum. These are just internet trolls. Truly.
Thanks!
I know all Americans are not the same, and I would love to see the land between the coasts also.
Thanks!
I know all Americans are not the same, and I would love to see the land between the coasts also.
And the thread keeps going! While you are visiting you can go to zinfella and frugality's wedding. Rumor has it they're getting hitched. Very sweet. Separate rooms mind you, to keep temptation at bay!
PS - No comment please, zinfella honey, you already voted.
Namndal - Do come to the US! And please, I hope you understand that most Americans, especially on the east and west coast, are not like Zinfella or any of the other nutters on display in this forum. These are just internet trolls. Truly.
And your source for that is? Actually, you have no source, as the majority of American people have already voted against gay marriage. Check out the states that ban it, and don't forget to add California and Arizona, come next Tuesday.