You obviously don’t understand what a contract is so you’d be better off walking away.
But what a contract is, can’t be changed. A contract between a person and himself is called a New Year’s resolution.
1 Like
If you say so. We certainly wouldn’t “need” interracial marriage. We certainly wouldn’t “need” marriage to be between just two people. But again we are treading in fiction. Life would find a way like Jurassic Park says.
I’m perfectly ok with an emotional argument or subjective appeal to fairness and equality. These gave us interracial marriage. They ended slavery. They gave blacks and women the right to vote. See none of that stuff was of “critical importance.” Society would have been ok. Life would have went on. But the world is a better place because we made those changes.
The world is just fine with gay marriage. I’d argue it’s better. It made a lot of people happy and feel better while harming no one.
I hope the headache goes away.
It isn’t lost on me that you always ignored that question. Because you know with all the ludicrous hypotheticals your life didn’t actually change. It’s not really about logic either. That flew the nest when you tried to argue about reproduction and straight people who couldn’t have kids. The one feather to keep gays from marriage yet it didn’t hold up at all. And logical reasons came at you numerous times about gay marriage. You just don’t like them. Doesn’t make them wrong.
Although my head is honestly going to explode at the idea of talking about logic on one hand and worshipping invisible superhero on the other hand.
Sure. Thanks for stopping in, Z man.
Looks like we disagree as I think I ripped apart opposing arguments. I saw no logic making my support necessary. Fascinating just how far apart people can be. It is feeling a bit better, ty.
We had plenty of reasons why gay people would want to marry. You don’t really have an answer for denying them except reproduction which would follow to ban all who couldn’t reproduce if that’s the ticket.
Since you don’t want to support that the conclusion for you seems to be they shouldn’t because they are gay. Which is fine let’s just not act like it’s more than that.
By your reasoning people who can’t reproduce shouldn’t marry. Which is fine as well. Society is moving forward one way or the other.
Man, we sure do see it differently. I feel like you all failed to obligate me by logic to support it. And, well, I think you’re all subjectivists (right?) so there never was a moral obligation for me. World’s apart.
I don’t think any of us ever thought we would have you feel like we do. I certainly never thought you would nor do I think you thought you would change minds. Worlds apart perhaps but in my view worlds apart on something fairly unimportant in the grand scheme.
Gay marriage won’t keep straights from having sex or from getting married. It just simply won’t. If someone was planning on having a kid they aren’t stopping because two women are in love.
It’s not fascinating when you consider you don’t have a clue about logic. It’s not your fault since you don’t really learn about it in high school.
He’s a virgin in case you haven’t realized. He doesn’t know about heterosexual sex and relationships, let alone homosexual.
Well, it was a great time!
Lol. I love this guy (no homo)!
It’s ok if it’s homo
1 Like
No, it’s not.
2 Likes
Testing reproductive ability brings a higher level of complication.
It could be much more simple and still logically consistent
I’m probably missing something but the thought occurred to me that ‘reasons for why gay people would want to marry’ is distinguishable from ‘reasons that the state should recognize gay marriages’.
Which are also distinguishable from why religious zombies would not want the state to allow them to marry.
Sure, which are also distinguishable from why religious zombies would not mind the state to ‘allow them to marry’, but would mind for the state to ‘recognize those marriages’
Why do religious zombies have a say? Is it because they are the root cause for the disdain of gays?
But remember Jesus loves the little children. All the children of the world. Red and yellow black and white they are precious in his sight. Learned that one in Bible school growing up.
Except gays apparently. And do you think any Catholics gave up despising gays for lent? Or was it just ice cream again this year?
Wait, so we are back to feelings? Meaning we are back to the reasons why gays would want the state to recognize their marriages.
The reason why the state would recognize a gay marriage has nothing to do with feelings, from either side, and everything to do with equal rights.
It probably has something to do with equal rights
I didn’t bring them up, but get the sense you are directing this at me
I would guess that the reason they keep getting brought up in this thread is so that nonreligious people can… something. It’s not the religious that keep bringing them up