Sucks to be an evolutionary dinosaur doesnt it?

So, should we just make crap up?

 

Gay marriage is awesome. You know why? Because it makes Jesus happy.

So, should we just make crap up?

 

Gay marriage is awesome. You know why? Because it makes Jesus happy.

lol

Sucks to be an evolutionary dinosaur doesnt it?

I think I'll manage... :cheers

Here's what I hate and you are being guilty of this. Being willingly ignorant. You were proved wrong, the points of your argument were faulty, and yet you have no change of opinion though you have no reason to believe what you believe. Absolutely ridiculous. However, to support Bush you need this quality.

You were proved wrong, the points of your argument were faulty, and yet you have no change of opinion though you have no reason to believe what you believe. Absolutely ridiculous. However, to support Bush you need this quality.

ZING!

Here's what I hate and you are being guilty of this. Being willingly ignorant. You were proved wrong, the points of your argument were faulty, and yet you have no change of opinion though you have no reason to believe what you believe. Absolutely ridiculous. However, to support Bush you need this quality.

I have reason to believe what I believe. Some of the points were shot down, yes, but it doesn't change everything. And who says I'm a Bush supporter?

I makes no sense.

uhn?... That added a lot.

Sorry that this is out of topic but i only have a computer at work. Back to the gay marriage debate, soriano im not discriminating against gays Im fighting for their rights, and the blacks voting thing is absurd because the term 'voting' is actually an informal word for casting a ballot, it does not nearly carry the weight of the word marriage. You keep sayign that my logic is faulty, but in fact youe are being unreasonable because you are saying gays must have marriage rights by that name and right now. That logic leads to stalemates and nothing getting done. This country is based on compromise in all aspects review your history and with the exception of results of war everything has been done through compromise. What is best for the gay community now is giving them marriage rights with a different name and slowly work it towards marriage, because if not your dragging out a fight that may take years to resolve otherwise.

Here's what I hate and you are being guilty of this. Being willingly ignorant. You were proved wrong, the points of your argument were faulty, and yet you have no change of opinion though you have no reason to believe what you believe. Absolutely ridiculous. However, to support Bush you need this quality.

I have reason to believe what I believe. Some of the points were shot down, yes, but it doesn't change everything. And who says I'm a Bush supporter? Regardless if you are a bush supporter are not, my point stands.

 

All of your reasons have been shot down but your faith. Don't impose your religion on others.

Sorry that this is out of topic but i only have a computer at work. Back to the gay marriage debate, soriano im not discriminating against gays Im fighting for their rights, and the blacks voting thing is absurd because the term 'voting' is actually an informal word for casting a ballot, it does not nearly carry the weight of the word marriage. You keep sayign that my logic is faulty, but in fact youe are being unreasonable because you are saying gays must have marriage rights by that name and right now. That logic leads to stalemates and nothing getting done. This country is based on compromise in all aspects review your history and with the exception of results of war everything has been done through compromise. What is best for the gay community now is giving them marriage rights with a different name and slowly work it towards marriage, because if not your dragging out a fight that may take years to resolve otherwise.

You are being discriminatory. You would not compromise the principle of black voting rights, yet you would do that to gay marriage? Build it on compromise all you want, my point still stands.

Will one of you pro gay-marriage people tell me how we are going to pay for it?

Will one of you pro gay-marriage people tell me how we are going to pay for it?

pay for what?

Will one of you pro gay-marriage people tell me how we are going to pay for it?

Oh no, we must rid people their rights because it is cheaper!!

 

Counting all of those black people's votes is expensive. And women. Lets get rid of those expensive amendments!

 

It is called principle.

If the fiscal bottom line is the policy bottom line, then we should do away with marriage altogether ... but that's a different topic.

Here's what I hate and you are being guilty of this.? Being willingly ignorant.? You were proved wrong, the points of your argument were faulty, and yet you have no change of opinion though you have no reason to believe what you believe.? Absolutely ridiculous.? However, to support Bush you need this quality.

I have reason to believe what I believe. Some of the points were shot down, yes, but it doesn't change everything. And who says I'm a Bush supporter? Regardless if you are a bush supporter are not, my point stands.

 

All of your reasons have been shot down but your faith. Don't impose your religion on others. Funny thing is, I'm not that religious of a person. I'm not trying to impose my religion on other people.

 

I just don't believe in changing something that has been around for so long. What benefit do Gays get from getting married anyways. They get to live together? They can do that without getting married. They get to live the rest of their lives with each other? They can do that without getting married, etc. etc.

 

Guess I just am not in favor of such radical change. Just an opinion, it just differs from yours.

Your point stands but the problem is that it isnt about right or wrong, your right it is wrong to not call it marriage, but as of now its what is best, and once civil rights are granted the fight continues, but I am not discriminating and you need to do whats best and slowly move to where you need to move.

Will one of you pro gay-marriage people tell me how we are going to pay for it?

Oh no, we must rid people their rights because it is cheaper!!

 

Counting all of those black people's votes is expensive. And women. Lets get rid of those expensive amendments!

 

It is called principle. Crap.

Get out of wonderland.

 

I'm starting to wonder if you are a little bit of a socialist there, Soriano I suppose you are all for nationalized healthcare too.

 

Are you feeling lazy today and don't want to dredge up some evidence to debate the point or what?

Big reply to 3 different people:

 

I just don't believe in changing something that has been around for so long. What benefit do Gays get from getting married anyways. They get to live together? They can do that without getting married. They get to live the rest of their lives with each other? They can do that without getting married, etc. etc.

 

Guess I just am not in favor of such radical change. Just an opinion, it just differs from yours.

1. By that logic, why should straights get married?

2. How is it such a radical change if gays already DO live with each other?

 

Your point stands but the problem is that it isnt about right or wrong, your right it is wrong to not call it marriage, but as of now its what is best, and once civil rights are granted the fight continues, but I am not discriminating and you need to do whats best and slowly move to where you need to move.

Again, you would not make such concessions for other rights, making you a hypocrite.

 

Crap.

Get out of wonderland.

 

I'm starting to wonder if you are a little bit of a socialist there, Soriano I suppose you are all for nationalized healthcare too.

 

Are you feeling lazy today and don't want to dredge up some evidence to debate the point or what?

Hmm, let's see, me a socialist or you proved wrong. No, you were just proved wrong. It is a matter of principle that all people are entitled to the same rights, that is principle.

 

If it were up to me, no one would get any tax breaks for marriage. That would fix your problem.

Ok, lets go rewrite the whole tax code now.

 

Don't you hate it when that stupid little thing called reality gets in the way of your "rationale?"

I just don't believe in changing something that has been around for so long. What benefit do Gays get from getting married anyways. They get to live together? They can do that without getting married. They get to live the rest of their lives with each other? They can do that without getting married, etc. etc.

 

Guess I just am not in favor of such radical change. Just an opinion, it just differs from yours.

1. By that logic, why should straights get married?

2. How is it such a radical change if gays already DO live with each other?

1. Let's see, straights get married because it's TRADITION.

2. Changing a TRADITION (that is a legal issue in this case) that's been around for 200 or so years in this country is something I would call radical change.

. I'm definetely not a hypocrite, blacks already vote so thats not even a subject. Secondly you hit the nail on the head, I am not compromising rights just what to call those rights. And i am willing to compromise the naming of things if it is practical and it will guarantee that rights will be served. You cannot deny that this stalemate in that topic is occuring because neither side is compromising. I am many things but my thought process in politics is based on life liberty and property, and the best ways to guarantee those rights. Stop with the "I am right your wrong responses" and argue using true logic, I want you to go do some work with the gay community and then come back and tell me that the name is more important than giving them their rights as soon as possible.

Okay, once I prove you wrong easily this time, will you stop?

 

1. Let's see, straights get married because it's TRADITION.

And di we already discuss there are a lot of other traditions throughout history beyond your personal definition?

 

2. Changing a TRADITION (that is a legal issue in this case) that's been around for 200 or so years in this country is something I would call radical change.

1. Women not voting was a tradition do you like that?

and

2. Marriage itself does not need to be confined because it is a tradition here, even though it deviates from other historical examples.

 

Quite simply, you are desiring an unethical ban for no good reasons. It is a shame.

Okay, once I prove you wrong easily this time, will you stop?

 

1. Let's see, straights get married because it's TRADITION.

And di we already discuss there are a lot of other traditions throughout history beyond your personal definition?

 

2. Changing a TRADITION (that is a legal issue in this case) that's been around for 200 or so years in this country is something I would call radical change.

1. Women not voting was a tradition do you like that?

and

2. Marriage itself does not need to be confined because it is a tradition here, even though it deviates from other historical examples.

 

Quite simply, you are desiring an unethical ban for no good reasons. It is a shame. In this country, the tradition is for straights to get married.

 

Women not voting is a big deal. Voting is a part of democracy, the govt itself. Marriage is putting a ring on someones finger and telling them you will be with them the rest of your life. Gays have the right to vote, they have the right to be with each other, they just don't have the right to participate in a tradition that has always been for straight people in this country. What is the big deal?

detroit the thing is if you really think about it, would giving gay people marriage rights really affect you in any way? Not really theyll go about doing the same things they do now, in fact in the 80s and early nineties many people had a negative impression of homosexuals as being overly promiscuous and perverse, allowing marriage will also quell these thoughts and allow people to see that homosexuals are just like everyone else and they deserve the rights associated with marriage.