Drudge: 1 JUDGE VOIDS 7,000,000 VOTERS...
- Thread starter DamnYankee
- Start date
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
lol...this is getting good
pray tell what physical limitation homosexuals have that would bar them from being qualified for marriage.
blind is easy...if you can't see, you put other people's lives in danger...
very weak, i expected better from you bud
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
That's the point, there is no physical limitation, but a mental one. Like we don't allow felons to own guns.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
:lol:
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Yurt, don't you think it rather odd that a man could get it up hard enough to jam his manhood up where another defecates? I could never understand rapists either, getting hard on a woman crying and screaming. There's something seriously wrong with these guy's brains. Why should that behavior be rewarded?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
what if i was black and wanted to marry a white person and california law said i could not....how is that discrimination, i could marry any black person, just as a white could marry any white person
further, as needs repeating...marriage is a fundamental right, subject to strict scrutiny...tell me what valid reasons under strict scrutiny does a state have for denying marriage licenses to same sex couples....
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Blacks and whites don't choose their race Yurt.
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
it is odd...then again i think a man plugging his wife's anus is also odd...YET, we "reward" that behavior...i think it is odd we allow britney spears type marriages, yet we "reward" that behavior...
it is not an award at all....as they can do that now, all we are giving them are equal rights and their due process...which you have not yet come up with any valid reason to deny them, other than you are morally opposed to ass sex...what i note is that you conveniently leave out lesbians
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
and neither do some homosexuals....
and choice is irrelevant, a red herring...the fact is denying rights to people, that is the key
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Society don't reward that behavior Yurt. Some elements might, but not society as a whole.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
How do you tell the ones who choose and the ones born with the defect?
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
That's the point, there is no physical limitation, but a mental one. Like we don't allow felons to own guns.
no, you compared it to a blind person driving...now you realize what a lame argument that was and so move the goal post....a state has legitimate reasons to deny felons rights to guns....there is no reason to deny marriage to homosexuals
i'm enjoying knocking down your arguments....with you though, it will simply be me knocking down all your arguments, but you never admitting you were wrong in making the argument...
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
Cancel 2018. 3
<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
red herring....we allow people with aids to marry
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Its both Yurt. Either or. How is that moving goal posts?no, you compared it to a blind person driving...now you realize what a lame argument that was and so move the goal post....a state has legitimate reasons to deny felons rights to guns....there is no reason to deny marriage to homosexuals
i'm enjoying knocking down your arguments....with you though, it will simply be me knocking down all your arguments, but you never admitting you were wrong in making the argument...
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
We shouldn't, but we have to draw the line somewhere. You don't need perfect vision to drive a car, nor a zero criminal effort to own a gun.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Who chooses to have AIDS?
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Ya know SM. That comment reminds me of the unique legal precedence set in Montana in the late 19th century when some cattle ranchers lynched some sheep herders. The judge, a cattle rancher himself, exonerated the other ranchers on the unique legal precedence that the sheep herders were better off dead.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Right!
And I was giving a reason that I believe they should have the same "rights" (actually benefits, not rights, there is a difference). I don't believe you do understand my position because your argument "against" it makes it clear you don't.