Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers

And therefore what? (1) Therefore allowing gays to get married will fix
it, or (2) Therefore, since no one has respect for the institution of
marriage, we should finish the job of destroying it by allowing gays to
"get married", or (3) Therefore, since no one has respect for the
insitution of marriage, why should or would anyone care that we are
proposing to deal it the final blow?

Brandon seemed to me to be using the "It's a failed institution,
therefore to fix it, gays ought to be allowed to get married" the other
day, but he denied that that was his logic. What I'm getting at is,
what does the fact that you think it's a failed insitution have to do
with your belief that gays ought to be allowed to get married? You must
think the gays will fix it, or why would you want to be part of such a
failed concept?

I think David Allen hit the proverbial nail on the head when he wrote:
"I think gay marriage would be fertile ground for unintended
consequenses. Marriage is relevent in the traditional sense. It
doesn't make sense for same sex other than a statement or 'cause'."
That certainly seems to be the case with the repeat of the "50% divorce
rate" and "failed institution" claims. Otherwise, what's the purpose of
claiming that repeatedly in a discussion on gays "getting married" if
that's not part of the justification?

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

 

David, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this
one. It has been a very informative and polite discussion which I've
enjoyed greatly!

All the best,
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

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

 

The whole thing was supported by the gov't, which is scary. Even Ari
Fleischer said "We have to watch what we say" (to paraphrase) in
response to Bill Maher's comments.

Freedom of speech? As long as you support the current regime...
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

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

 

What's the difference between not have a right and having a right but
not having it recognized?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

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

 

Not at all. A more relevent metric wouldn't be the divorce rate, but the
percent of people married regardless of how many times. The percent of
people not ever getting married or never remarrying would be a better
indicator of the decreased relevence of the institution. Even so, that
"failure" rate doesn't diminish marriage, it diminishes society.

 

Thanks. I think we've devolved into talking in circles

 

Will the pea-brained mouth breathing ratchet jawed socially
deficient losers keep this thread going forever, or will someday
it be allowed to die a merciful and long overdue death?

Roughly 12/10/03 18:57, David J. Allen's monkeys randomly typed:

 

Roughly 12/10/03 18:32, David J. Allen's monkeys randomly typed:

...yeah, mainly that of causing excessive off-topic crossposting.

 

Roughly 12/10/03 18:32, David J. Allen's monkeys randomly typed:

 

p[]

 

[]

 

[]

 

[...]

 

Roughly 12/11/03 07:55, David J. Allen's monkeys randomly typed:

 

[]

 

..... ..... ..... ....

 

---...-..----.....---.-.-.....----

 

===--==---=--====----===-

 

H'm. So it's OK with you for some dumb slob to tell lies every couple
years about "In sickness and in health" and "til death do us part" when
s/he really means "...or until someone better/richer comes along,
whichever comes first", and as long as the slob's heterosexual, this
DOESN'T diminish marriage as an institution, eh?

DS

 

To someone who thinks all rights come from governments, I guess not
much.
However, certain rights (such as a right to life) transcend
governments; governments don't grant such rights, but they can
recognize them.
If you have a right that your government doesn't recognize, it's much
easier to get it to recognize it, as opposed to rights that the
government does grant (like driving, for example).