Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

Most of the first world disagrees with you.

Oh? Go ahead and provide it, then.

T-H-X, DTJ...the audience is listening.

DS

 

Heh heh! Good point - I assumed...

But if you're for those other things too (i.e., I can marry my dog, my
cat, my tree, my car, my daughter, my mother...), then it makes it
appear that, truly, you just want to totally gut the institution and any
meaning of the word "marriage". That does appear to be the goal of
some.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

No, but neither do I accept that homosexuality is more than a choice. I
just believe that there is a "natural" order to things.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

My concience will be clear before God. It will all be sorted out in the
end.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

Oh, indubitably. For all recorded history, some people have been
*choosing* to get ostracized (at best) and violently killed (at worst) by
their families and society at large. Fer sher, fer sher.

....which, apparently, includes only those things you deem "natural".

DS

 

Whoops, that wasn't part of the question. We were discussing consenting
adults.

Try again?

DS

 

There are significant medical reasons for disallowing siblings to
marry. Are you suggesting that there are similar reasons preventing
gays from marrying?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

Why is re-evalution bad? The current model is failing badly at the
moment, unless you consider a 50% failure rate to be a success.

If people were truly colour blind then those institutions would have
no purpose and would disappear. Racism occurs on both sides,
unfortunately.

Two people formally agreeing to an exclusive arrangement. Sounds
pretty similar to me.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

And that benefit is children, right? Which brings us back to couples
who can't or don't want to have children. It also leads us to the
question of what is better for kids? An unhappy marriage between a
man and a woman or a happy relationship between two men or two women?
As long as they learn how to love someone else, it doesn't matter the
sex of that person.

Tough on atheists, isn't it? Every right is granted by the community,
not god (which god anyways?).

If only we could come to a fair balance. The problem now is that as
soon as something is suggested by the left the right reflexively
dismisses it and the same thing happens to that suggested by the
right. *Who* puts forward the idea has become more important than the
idea itself.

Women working changed the nature of marriage too. We survived.

Why should you differentiate on gender for anything except who your
life partner is?

The courts *should* protect what individuals choose. It would seem
that you're all about freedom until it compromises your ideas about
what people should be doing.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

Have you never heard of a sperm bank?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

You do realize that people will continue to call it marriage despite
what the technical term is. It will mean the exact same thing for
those people as well.

Right now you're just bothered by semantics.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

We're already in the long run now. With divorce rates as high as they
are, marriage has apparently lost whatever sacred aspect there was to
it to society in general.

They provide a stable environment for those kids to grow up in.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

Why not just acknowledge that they have the right to marry?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

Not that I'm aware of, unless they want to work for free.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

Are you assigning to a dog or a tree the same capabilities and legal
status as a human?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

 

Strawman. The difference between a heterosexual or a homosexual individual is
defined by the activities the individual engages in.

 

My previous posts that you responded to were about those other things.
The issue I was discussing was the changing of the definiton of marriage
to satisfy everyone's desires - since you didn't indicate otherwise, I
assumed that you were continuing along those lines. You claim
discrimination by excluding gays. I claim that others could claim that
you would want to discriminate against them because you would exlude
non-adults, non-humans, or even non-living things for those humans that
wanted to marry, say, their dog, tree, torque wrench, etc.

Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")

 

Slippery-slope arguments have never held much persuasive or logical
weight.

And this is a slippery-slope argument totally divorced, as it were, from
any reality.

DS

 

By you, perhaps. Not by them, nor by most folks with credentials in
psychology, physiology, behavioural science and other related fields.

DS

 

So much for equal treatment!