Some American's Lose.....
- Thread starter onthebottom
- Start date
I'm not gay, but a few points:MLAM said:
1) They reject the notion of "separate but equal" the same way Southern blacks rejected it
2) The government should not be able to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Writing a marriage law that discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation is wrong for that principle alone: It sets a precedent on which basis other discriminatory laws could be written.
3) Marriage is not necessarily a religious institution, we have already accepted that people can be married by a judge
4) Many religions, including many Christian ones, accept gay marriage and a law against it imposes YOUR religiuos views on those religions. No particular religious view should be encoded into law--all major religions (excluding cults) should be equally accepted.
5) The government has no business intruding into personal decisions of this nature
At least one state has already passed a law that you have to be "married" (civil union excluded) in order to adopt a child, so it is separate and unequal. It opens the door to all sorts of discrimination with any number of government agencies, states, clubs, organizations, whatever, declaring that they only serve "married" people.MLAM said:
AKA "Jim Crow 2008".
so the US has come in a way that a black man got elected president, but they still wont give basic civil rights to gays? hmmm doesnt sound like much progress at all
why should a heterosexual couple that have known each other for 5 minutes (every celebrity marriage) be allowed to marry while a homosexual couple that have been together for years not afforded the same rights. As for the civil unions argument well that sounds a lot like the separate but equal nonsense used to keep blacks to drinking from their own water fountains.
why should a heterosexual couple that have known each other for 5 minutes (every celebrity marriage) be allowed to marry while a homosexual couple that have been together for years not afforded the same rights. As for the civil unions argument well that sounds a lot like the separate but equal nonsense used to keep blacks to drinking from their own water fountains.
Not to me. Voting for Obama doesn't mean you support gay marriages. 90% of the world was rooting for Obama over McCain. But I'll wager anything that 90% of the world does NOT approve of gay marriage. In fact the USA is one of the few places around the world where gay marriage is recognized (Massachusetts and Connecticut). Even everyone's favorite egalitarian society, Sweden, does not recognize it.onthebottom said:
Registered partnership was granted in Sweden in 1995. Sweden was the third country to legally recognise same-sex unions, after Denmark and Norway.Don said:
The Registered Partnership Act grants full range of protections, responsibilities and benefits as marriage, including adoption and arrangements for the breakdown of the relationship only available to same-sex couples. Same-sex registered partners can adopt jointly. In vitro fertilisation for lesbian couples was allowed in 2005. Non-Swedes who are legally resident in Sweden have the right to enter into the registered partnership since 2000.
The main distinction between registered partnership and marriage is that they are covered by separate laws, and that same-sex partnerships are a civil matter and cannot be conducted through the church authority (although the Church of Sweden recently approved a ceremony to bless same-sex partnerships). Many people have complained about this inequality, asking for a gender-neutral marriage law. Many would even like a gender-neutral marriage that would conducted solely by the state, as is done in several other countries, rather than the current system in which churches have the authority to (legally) marry people, because this would further the separation of church and state.
In Swedish society, same-sex partnerships are generally considered to be on an equal plane as heterosexual marriage, and the phrase "gifta sig" which means to get married is commonly used by same-sex couples.
I've already commented...
"The problem with "civil unions", "domestic partnerships" and the like, compared to "marriage" is that homosexuals do not get the same legal rights, property rights, family benefits and other benefits and rights. Not to mention the nearly 1200 laws that make "marital" status a factor. Comprehensive legal rights and benefits are the main issue for the gay community, not some hogwash about institutions. "
Wrong. Every Civil union initiative *I* am familiar with granted FULL LEGAL RIGHTS to civil unions. Some in fact removed the concept of "marriage" from the state legally...essentially saying that insofar as the state is concerned, marriage itself no longer existed...ONLY civil unions. That wasn't good enough for gays. So fuck em.
"And to compare homosexual marriage rights to pedophiles, bestiality, polygamy and the like is not only incredibly insensitive, but outright insulting."
Sort of like comparing being gay to being Black, but since I am beating you aren't Black...you don't think of it as insensitive...
(Aside: Please provide some sort of evidence that homosexuals have stated "oh what you think is stupid" regarding this issue.)"
Are you retarded? Are you REALLY claiming you've never heard anyone gay persons mock peoples religious convictions?? Don't be an asshole....
By your words and tone in this thread, I would guess that you just don't like homosexuals - nothing more, nothing less.
And I'd guess you are not a particularly religiously convicted person. So what?
The people have spoken. Gays would HAVE all the rights they sought if they hadn't pushed the issue. Fuck em.
...on what I think about people who believe being gay...which you can (and many do) keep to themselves, is comparable to being Black. It is a comparison only the stupid patronizing and WHITE would make....so I ignored all that.Captain Fantastic said:
"The problem with "civil unions", "domestic partnerships" and the like, compared to "marriage" is that homosexuals do not get the same legal rights, property rights, family benefits and other benefits and rights. Not to mention the nearly 1200 laws that make "marital" status a factor. Comprehensive legal rights and benefits are the main issue for the gay community, not some hogwash about institutions. "
Wrong. Every Civil union initiative *I* am familiar with granted FULL LEGAL RIGHTS to civil unions. Some in fact removed the concept of "marriage" from the state legally...essentially saying that insofar as the state is concerned, marriage itself no longer existed...ONLY civil unions. That wasn't good enough for gays. So fuck em.
"And to compare homosexual marriage rights to pedophiles, bestiality, polygamy and the like is not only incredibly insensitive, but outright insulting."
Sort of like comparing being gay to being Black, but since I am beating you aren't Black...you don't think of it as insensitive...
(Aside: Please provide some sort of evidence that homosexuals have stated "oh what you think is stupid" regarding this issue.)"
Are you retarded? Are you REALLY claiming you've never heard anyone gay persons mock peoples religious convictions?? Don't be an asshole....
By your words and tone in this thread, I would guess that you just don't like homosexuals - nothing more, nothing less.
And I'd guess you are not a particularly religiously convicted person. So what?
The people have spoken. Gays would HAVE all the rights they sought if they hadn't pushed the issue. Fuck em.
Exactly...
Multiple surveys have made it clear that the American people in the majority SUPPORT civil unions that provide all the rights of marriage to homosexuals... and that marriage itself is an institution reserved for a single man and woman. Indeed...if anyone actually remembers history...the first "gay marriage" initiatives WERE civil unions...in Hawaii...in Vermont. And they passed...and while those on the extreme right squawked...there was no movement to strike the laws down.
But...that wasn't good enough..gays wanted to be able to say "Nah nay I'm married too...just like you!!" They didn't care how that would offend people, they wanted people to be FORCED to not only recognize their relationship legally...but morally.
And it bit them in the ass.
Fuck em.
...it quit being about "rights" a LONG time ago.trufflepiggy said:
Multiple surveys have made it clear that the American people in the majority SUPPORT civil unions that provide all the rights of marriage to homosexuals... and that marriage itself is an institution reserved for a single man and woman. Indeed...if anyone actually remembers history...the first "gay marriage" initiatives WERE civil unions...in Hawaii...in Vermont. And they passed...and while those on the extreme right squawked...there was no movement to strike the laws down.
But...that wasn't good enough..gays wanted to be able to say "Nah nay I'm married too...just like you!!" They didn't care how that would offend people, they wanted people to be FORCED to not only recognize their relationship legally...but morally.
And it bit them in the ass.
Fuck em.
Touch a nerve?MLAM said:
The point is simply that people are who they are and there are much more important things to judge a person on than the colour of their skin or their sexual orientation - to pre-judge so is discrimination, plain and simple.
Further, a person shouldn't have to hide who and what they are just because of bigots of any persuasion. Not today and not in our society. Too many people have fought too long and too hard to just say "fuck 'em" to the next group that are being discriminated against. It's an insult to the progress and sacrifices we've made.
Your lack of knowledge on this subject is frightening. The majority of gays want the same marriage rights (legal, familial, benefits, etc.) as others, nothing more or less. (And yes, there is a vocal minority that may not be to everyone's tastes in how they present their demands, but that doesn't take away from their right to basic human rights, nor should it.)MLAM said:
What is currently offerred in most of the "civil union" initiatives do not grant that - look it up. This includes benefits and distribution of assets in the event of death, custody of children and anything legal that has to do with "marriage" (including shield laws that protect one from testifying against one's spouse), because the laws on the books only take into account MARRIAGE, not civil unions, etc. Unfortunately, there are numerous precedents on this point already. Do some homework before you make such unfounded sweeping statements.
In addition, the notion that "marriage is a sacred religious bond" has been debunked by the fact that one can get a judge/justice of the peace to marry you in a quickie ceremony, not to mention the incredibly high divorce rates. And don't even get me started on Vegas drive-through wedding "chapels"...
I am well aware of the unique plight of African-Americans and the sensitivities that must come from that. But there is a parallel between the two if you would open yourself up to seeing it.MLAM said:
I also knew what I posted would get you wound up, which is why I wrote it. I was trying to elicit some semblance of empathy in you, but it's obvious that you are completely biased against gays. Which is your personal right, as barbaric as I may find it.
Fighting for one's rights has gone on for time immemorial - my point is we should be beyond arguing about such basic matters at this point in the U.S. and Canada. Inherent rights should be there for all and the Church should have no say in the matter. We are supposedly a constitutional democracy with inalienable rights protected by our government, not a theocracy run by a vocal religious minority.
No, but apparently you are. Because you have not provided one shred of proof in any of your arguments. It is almost completely based on visceral emotion.MLAM said:
I have never heard a spokesperson for gay rights publicly state anything of the sort. They're not idiots and know how to lobby. Now, as for those gays that make the same kind of emotional arguments that you are, on the other hand... <wink>
Seriously though, I think you should take your own advice about not being an asshole...
My spirituality does not include judging people for anything other than their character - how well they treat their families and others, what they do for their community and the world-at-large, etc. Things like race and sexual orientation (between consenting adults) don't factor into my thought process.MLAM said:
I also don't believe in slavish devotion to any book (a piece of fiction, at that) that was conceived of and written hundreds of years ago based on the oral histories of mostly elitist white men who had their own agenda of fear and contral and that were passed on in a narrow-minded belief system of a cold and brutal world. And I certainly wouldn't use my or anyone elses' interpretation of that work as a basis for being what amounts to being a racist/sexist/intolerant. That sort of fascist/fundamentalist mindset is eerily similar to what certain individuals use as justification for wonderful contributions to society like honour killings and terrorist acts.
Quite frankly, I have to question your so-called religious convictions. You hang out on an escort review board, posting many things that are less than Christian-spiritual and take umbrage at anything remotely anti-black / African-American (as your rant against LL showed), yet can't see the hypocrisy in being insensitively anti-gay. I could be wrong, but you appear to be selectively fervent.
And even if you are as devout as your purport, your religious beliefs should not trump my (and others, including gays) rights under law. Again, I believe strongly in the separation of Church and State...
As I hinted at in my initial "get your attention and try and tweak your sensibilities" post - what would your response be to blacks and others who have had to go through civil rights movements or suffrage who dealt with the racists who said that "negroes (or women or insert any other minority here) should know their place and not push the issue" of civil rights?
I doubt you would be so flippantly dismissive as to say "fuck 'em".
It's only a matter of time before this proposition is reversed. The percentage of the population that is homophobic and/or opposed to gay rights has been consistently dropping year over year for a long time.
Last time gay marriage was on the ballot in CA it was opposed by 60% of the population. This time just a shade over 50% opposed it.
There's a pretty clear trend.
I give it 10 years and this ballot initiative gets overturned as Californian society continues moving out from the dark ages and into the 21st century.
Last time gay marriage was on the ballot in CA it was opposed by 60% of the population. This time just a shade over 50% opposed it.
There's a pretty clear trend.
I give it 10 years and this ballot initiative gets overturned as Californian society continues moving out from the dark ages and into the 21st century.
Obama's biggest problem is that he's been a blank canvas upon which everyone has projected their own views..... the phrase, you can't satisfy all the people all the time leaps to mind.ocean976124 said:
That expectation hangover should be the worst just about 2010 for the mid-terms, which is why the party out of the White House almost always picks up seats.
OTB
Ahh...
Seriously...like I said - I am not even going to BEGIN to try to defend something to people who don't subscribe to it and in fact are opposed. It is pointless. It is all reduced to "you are no better than me" and "that doesn't make sense"...both arguments you made here. You jump up and down to boast of your assumed intellectual and personal superiority because you don't subscribe to something that is dearly important to others...
"I also don't believe in slavish devotion to any book (a piece of fiction, at that) that was conceived of and written hundreds of years ago based on the oral histories of mostly elitist white men who had their own agenda of fear and contral and that were passed on in a narrow-minded belief system of a cold and brutal world. And I certainly wouldn't use my or anyone elses' interpretation of that work as a basis for being what amounts to being a racist/sexist/intolerant. That sort of fascist/fundamentalist mindset is eerily similar to what certain individuals use as justification for wonderful contributions to society like honour killings and terrorist acts."
It is EXACTLY this attitude that is the reason why homosexuals today face constitutional amendments in 30 stated banning gay marriage. They didn't respect the beliefs of the people they were asking to change...they belittled them...were dismissive toward them...just as you were here.
And accordingly...they got what they got. Had they taken a different approach...they would have probably gotten a different result. Again - the majority of Americans are in favor of granting all the rights associated with marriage to gay couples. They simply believe that MARRIAGE is between one man and one woman. The gay community mounted a legal challenge to that...even in a climate that was GRANTING civil unions...because they wanted what THEY wanted when THEY wanted...regardless of who or what they needed to run over to get it. They showed a lack of respect for what was important to others not like them, while at the same time asking for respect for what was important to them. Accordingly, the American people responded with a legal defense of what was important to them...and since they were in the majority...they won.
See...it isn't about me. I wasn't the one who first became "passionate"...and then made parallel references intended to inflame. A question was posed - how could this happen. An answer was given - because the majority of Americans still believe marriage is between one man and one woman, because that is the moral fabric of the U.S., versus other countries / cultures / societies that have other mores and values. The reason for this is because the U.S. is a Judo-Christian centric nation. It has very little to nothing to do with the religious conviction of each individual...it is simply to perspective they were given as they were raised. And you have to be careful when you tell people "what you believe is wrong". Regardless of being in amorally superior position or not...you still have to show respect for the person whose mindset you are attempting to change.
Gays did not. And so...I have no sympathy for their cause....just as I would have no sympathy for anyone who attempted to gain their ends by bullying those who disagree with them though contemptuous disrespect for their values....which also applies here. And, which also applies on every other issue for me...including those who have radical RIGHT WING anti gay agendas.
So...you and others can feel as morally and intellectual and personally as superior as you wish. But...if gays want to have the legal rights they seek...they might give thought to being a bit less condescending about it.
The people have spoken. Next step is to go to the people...understand how they feel and why they feel that way...and deal with those sentiments respectfully. There is LOTS of middle ground here...again, the majority of Americans do not wish to deny gays ANY of the rights associated with marriage...and accordingly could be recruited as allies against the passage and / or retention of laws that work against that. Speaking for myself, I know I could be recruited for such a cause. I actually joined a political action group that was making itself ready to fight against a FEDERAL amendment banning gay marriage, because I (like the majority of Americans) thought that was perversion of the constitution.
But...you aren't going to make any friends with this attitude....
'I also don't believe in slavish devotion to any book (a piece of fiction, at that) that was conceived of and written hundreds of years ago based on the oral histories of mostly elitist white men who had their own agenda of fear and contral and that were passed on in a narrow-minded belief system of a cold and brutal world. And I certainly wouldn't use my or anyone elses' interpretation of that work as a basis for being what amounts to being a racist/sexist/intolerant. That sort of fascist/fundamentalist mindset is eerily similar to what certain individuals use as justification for wonderful contributions to society like honour killings and terrorist acts."
...which essentially says "you are an idiot for believing the things you believe...and I am just so much smarter and better than you". Disrespect begets disrespect.
Again - and then you can go back to your routine of self aggrandizing mental masturbation leading to the wonderful self satisfaction of knowing you are better than...because I have explained this several times already, and you aren't going to listen, and I am not a fool - you do not change a persons beliefs and values by telling them said beliefs and values are "stupid". Gays pushed - hard - at something most people worldwide (the list of countries that have gay marriage or even civil unions is really, really short) believe to be a fundamental truth...that marriage is an institution between men and women who are of consensual age not closely related by blood. This construct traverses countries...religions...societies. Does this truth have to endure? Absolutely not. The reality is that people and their perspectives evolve. But you don't get a person to open their mind by saying "you are stupid".
And so...when the gay community chose to not let social discourse and social change continue in the path it was already headed in (I again remind you that at the beginning of this evolutionary change there were MORE states where civil unions were established, and were surviving legal challenge by those on the extreme right than have it now) and instead to FORCE the issue by making a legal challenge to what people believe fundamentally...those people chose to push back. And the majority won.
Fortunately for gays - there are LOTS of people in the middle who do understand that their beliefs are personal and that they do not have to be legislated. People who are perfectly capable of believing what they believe, while respecting the right of other to differ, and not having their beliefs impact how they deal with and relate to people outside of their most personal relationships. People who even believe what they believe but STILL DO also think it is important that all couples who are prepared to make a legal commitment be also granted all the legal rights and standing associated with that traditionally. There are far more people like that than people who are opposed to recognition of gay rights.
But you aren't going to win those peoples support by calling them "stupid" and not respecting their beliefs. The real bottom line is that the majority of people are not "intellectuals", and accordingly, make things really, really simple. They aren't gay, they don't need gay marriage, and they don't like it when people make fun of them.
...fuck em.Captain Fantastic said:Further, a person shouldn't have to hide who and what they are just because of bigots of any persuasion. Not today and not in our society. Too many people have fought too long and too hard to just say "fuck 'em" to the next group that are being discriminated against. It's an insult to the progress and sacrifices we've made.
In addition, the notion that "marriage is a sacred religious bond" has been debunked by the fact that one can get a judge/justice of the peace to marry you in a quickie ceremony, not to mention the incredibly high divorce rates. And don't even get me started on Vegas drive-through wedding "chapels"...
Fighting for one's rights has gone on for time immemorial - my point is we should be beyond arguing about such basic matters at this point in the U.S. and Canada. Inherent rights should be there for all and the Church should have no say in the matter. We are supposedly a constitutional democracy with inalienable rights protected by our government, not a theocracy run by a vocal religious minority.
No, but apparently you are. Because you have not provided one shred of proof in any of your arguments. It is almost completely based on visceral emotion.
My spirituality does not include judging people for anything other than their character - how well they treat their families and others, what they do for their community and the world-at-large, etc. Things like race and sexual orientation (between consenting adults) don't factor into my thought process.
As I hinted at in my initial "get your attention and try and tweak your sensibilities" post - what would your response be to blacks and others who have had to go through civil rights movements or suffrage who dealt with the racists who said that "negroes (or women or insert any other minority here) should know their place and not push the issue" of civil rights?
I doubt you would be so flippantly dismissive as to say "fuck 'em".
Seriously...like I said - I am not even going to BEGIN to try to defend something to people who don't subscribe to it and in fact are opposed. It is pointless. It is all reduced to "you are no better than me" and "that doesn't make sense"...both arguments you made here. You jump up and down to boast of your assumed intellectual and personal superiority because you don't subscribe to something that is dearly important to others...
"I also don't believe in slavish devotion to any book (a piece of fiction, at that) that was conceived of and written hundreds of years ago based on the oral histories of mostly elitist white men who had their own agenda of fear and contral and that were passed on in a narrow-minded belief system of a cold and brutal world. And I certainly wouldn't use my or anyone elses' interpretation of that work as a basis for being what amounts to being a racist/sexist/intolerant. That sort of fascist/fundamentalist mindset is eerily similar to what certain individuals use as justification for wonderful contributions to society like honour killings and terrorist acts."
It is EXACTLY this attitude that is the reason why homosexuals today face constitutional amendments in 30 stated banning gay marriage. They didn't respect the beliefs of the people they were asking to change...they belittled them...were dismissive toward them...just as you were here.
And accordingly...they got what they got. Had they taken a different approach...they would have probably gotten a different result. Again - the majority of Americans are in favor of granting all the rights associated with marriage to gay couples. They simply believe that MARRIAGE is between one man and one woman. The gay community mounted a legal challenge to that...even in a climate that was GRANTING civil unions...because they wanted what THEY wanted when THEY wanted...regardless of who or what they needed to run over to get it. They showed a lack of respect for what was important to others not like them, while at the same time asking for respect for what was important to them. Accordingly, the American people responded with a legal defense of what was important to them...and since they were in the majority...they won.
See...it isn't about me. I wasn't the one who first became "passionate"...and then made parallel references intended to inflame. A question was posed - how could this happen. An answer was given - because the majority of Americans still believe marriage is between one man and one woman, because that is the moral fabric of the U.S., versus other countries / cultures / societies that have other mores and values. The reason for this is because the U.S. is a Judo-Christian centric nation. It has very little to nothing to do with the religious conviction of each individual...it is simply to perspective they were given as they were raised. And you have to be careful when you tell people "what you believe is wrong". Regardless of being in amorally superior position or not...you still have to show respect for the person whose mindset you are attempting to change.
Gays did not. And so...I have no sympathy for their cause....just as I would have no sympathy for anyone who attempted to gain their ends by bullying those who disagree with them though contemptuous disrespect for their values....which also applies here. And, which also applies on every other issue for me...including those who have radical RIGHT WING anti gay agendas.
So...you and others can feel as morally and intellectual and personally as superior as you wish. But...if gays want to have the legal rights they seek...they might give thought to being a bit less condescending about it.
The people have spoken. Next step is to go to the people...understand how they feel and why they feel that way...and deal with those sentiments respectfully. There is LOTS of middle ground here...again, the majority of Americans do not wish to deny gays ANY of the rights associated with marriage...and accordingly could be recruited as allies against the passage and / or retention of laws that work against that. Speaking for myself, I know I could be recruited for such a cause. I actually joined a political action group that was making itself ready to fight against a FEDERAL amendment banning gay marriage, because I (like the majority of Americans) thought that was perversion of the constitution.
But...you aren't going to make any friends with this attitude....
'I also don't believe in slavish devotion to any book (a piece of fiction, at that) that was conceived of and written hundreds of years ago based on the oral histories of mostly elitist white men who had their own agenda of fear and contral and that were passed on in a narrow-minded belief system of a cold and brutal world. And I certainly wouldn't use my or anyone elses' interpretation of that work as a basis for being what amounts to being a racist/sexist/intolerant. That sort of fascist/fundamentalist mindset is eerily similar to what certain individuals use as justification for wonderful contributions to society like honour killings and terrorist acts."
...which essentially says "you are an idiot for believing the things you believe...and I am just so much smarter and better than you". Disrespect begets disrespect.
Again - and then you can go back to your routine of self aggrandizing mental masturbation leading to the wonderful self satisfaction of knowing you are better than...because I have explained this several times already, and you aren't going to listen, and I am not a fool - you do not change a persons beliefs and values by telling them said beliefs and values are "stupid". Gays pushed - hard - at something most people worldwide (the list of countries that have gay marriage or even civil unions is really, really short) believe to be a fundamental truth...that marriage is an institution between men and women who are of consensual age not closely related by blood. This construct traverses countries...religions...societies. Does this truth have to endure? Absolutely not. The reality is that people and their perspectives evolve. But you don't get a person to open their mind by saying "you are stupid".
And so...when the gay community chose to not let social discourse and social change continue in the path it was already headed in (I again remind you that at the beginning of this evolutionary change there were MORE states where civil unions were established, and were surviving legal challenge by those on the extreme right than have it now) and instead to FORCE the issue by making a legal challenge to what people believe fundamentally...those people chose to push back. And the majority won.
Fortunately for gays - there are LOTS of people in the middle who do understand that their beliefs are personal and that they do not have to be legislated. People who are perfectly capable of believing what they believe, while respecting the right of other to differ, and not having their beliefs impact how they deal with and relate to people outside of their most personal relationships. People who even believe what they believe but STILL DO also think it is important that all couples who are prepared to make a legal commitment be also granted all the legal rights and standing associated with that traditionally. There are far more people like that than people who are opposed to recognition of gay rights.
But you aren't going to win those peoples support by calling them "stupid" and not respecting their beliefs. The real bottom line is that the majority of people are not "intellectuals", and accordingly, make things really, really simple. They aren't gay, they don't need gay marriage, and they don't like it when people make fun of them.
I didn't say..
...it didn't matter to me. I said it was irrelevant to this discussion - because this discussion isn't about me, despite the best efforts of others.
The majority of American feel that marriage is defined as being between one man and one woman...and every time this has been put to a vote, they have reaffirmed this. So...what does it matter what I think? Making this about me doesn't change that...Prop 8 will still stand regardless of what is posted here, because the majority of the opposing posts fall into the same trap homosexuals fell into - the "How can you think / believe / feel that way?? That is crazy. You are stupid" argument.
How's that working for homosexuals so far?
red said:
...it didn't matter to me. I said it was irrelevant to this discussion - because this discussion isn't about me, despite the best efforts of others.
The majority of American feel that marriage is defined as being between one man and one woman...and every time this has been put to a vote, they have reaffirmed this. So...what does it matter what I think? Making this about me doesn't change that...Prop 8 will still stand regardless of what is posted here, because the majority of the opposing posts fall into the same trap homosexuals fell into - the "How can you think / believe / feel that way?? That is crazy. You are stupid" argument.
How's that working for homosexuals so far?
