SCOTUS protects marriage equality

ZenMode said:
It's a waste of time because you don't want to acknowledge how dumb it is to say gays can get married, but only to someone they don't even want to marry.
Click to expand...
Right!!! They CAN get married who they WANT to marry doesn't matter. Same with straight people. Its not relevant to who can get married. Now answer the question could a gay man marry a woman even if he announced he was gay?
 
ZenMode said:
Nope, it didn't. It was a response that focuses on the most relevant aspect of what is a bad argument. If you tell a black slave that there is freedom for blacks in the US, but that slave can't be free, what good is it?

What good is it for a gay person to be able to marry someone of the opposite sex when we both know that they don't want, and aren't attracted to, the opposite sex? That isn't freedom and equality, so maybe stop with the gfm-type of word games.
Click to expand...
That's nonsensical as slavery was forced on blacks. Marriage isn't forced on anyone. AGAIN stop with the slavery analogy it doesn't work.

More irrelevant static. Can a straight person marry someone they don't want to marry or isn't attracted to? Yes or no? What they want isn't relevant to the application of the law.
 
Yakuda said:
Right!!! They CAN get married who they WANT to marry doesn't matter. Same with straight people. Its not relevant to who can get married. Now answer the question could a gay man marry a woman even if he announced he was gay?
Click to expand...
Yes, a gay person could marry someone they don't want to marry if they announced they were gay.

So, in summary your, and @gfm7175 , idea of equality is:

"Straight people can marry the person they want to marry and gay people can marry the person that the straight people allow them to marry, even though it's not who they want to marry."

Got it! (y)

If that isn't what America is all about I don't know what is.... :rolleyes:
 
ZenMode said:
Yes, a gay person could marry someone they don't want to marry if they announced they were gay.

So, in summary your, and @gfm7175 , idea of equality is:

"Straight people can marry the person they want to marry and gay people can marry the person that the straight people allow them to marry, even though it's not who they want to marry."

Got it! (y)
Click to expand...
Wow you really can't grasp this simple concept. Want isnt relevant to the application of the law.
 
Yakuda said:
Wow you really can't grasp this simple concept. Want isnt relevant to the application not the law.
Click to expand...
You aren't arguing law and neither is gfm. You are arguing how things should be and there is a 100% chance that, of give the chance, you would vote to deny marriage to gays.
 
ZenMode said:
You aren't arguing law and neither is gfm. You are arguing how things should be and there is a 100% chance that, of give the chance, you would vote to deny marriage to gays.
Click to expand...
No thats you. What IS is that a gay man could always marry a woman even if he announced he was get. The WANT is you saying how it should be. The law made no provisions against gays and it never prevented gays from marrying.
 
AProudLefty said:
Gay people were denied same-sex marriages.
Click to expand...
That's a square circle. You could argue they were denied the privileges afforded in marriage but they weren't denied marriage. I'm all for civil unions. You want to claim that a same sex union is the same as marriage but it's not. Any similarity is like a motorcycle to a bicycle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top