Rough Libertarian Critique of Conservatives

WinterBorn said:
And Dixon, just as an FYI, not all the benefits denied gay couples are financial in nature.

Often only spouses can visit patients in ICU. And spouses often have extended visiting privileges in other parts of hospitals.
Click to expand...

Thats hospital policy, not marriage law. And its not just "gay" couples but in fact any couple other than a married heterosexual couple. No more a denial of rights to exclude a gay lover, than it is a platonic friend. Nothing special about being 'gay" that would warrant such special treatment.
 
dixon76710 said:
A lesbian couple cant become pregnant. One of the lesbian couple can become pregnant by a man. The other half of the lesbian couple has no relation or obligation to the child fathered by somebody lse.
Click to expand...

What about if the fertilised egg of lesbian A were implanted into lesbian B to produce a child - let's call it C as that seems appropriate?

One has a genetic link and the other carried little C for 9 months. Relation and obligation, no?
 
charver said:
What about if the fertilised egg of lesbian A were implanted into lesbian B to produce a child - let's call it C as that seems appropriate?

One has a genetic link and the other carried little C for 9 months. Relation and obligation, no?
Click to expand...
Hmmmm I "C" your point.
 
dixon76710 said:
Thus my claim they are advocating for "gay" marriage. Not marriage for "all". Special treatment for gays because they are so special,
Click to expand...

Its funny, you think giving a gay couple the same benefits as straight couples is "special treatment".
 
dixon76710 said:
Thats hospital policy, not marriage law. And its not just "gay" couples but in fact any couple other than a married heterosexual couple. No more a denial of rights to exclude a gay lover, than it is a platonic friend. Nothing special about being 'gay" that would warrant such special treatment.
Click to expand...

Well.....except a platonic couple is that way by choice. The gay couple is like that because legally, they have no options.
 
dixon76710 said:
A lesbian couple cant become pregnant. One of the lesbian couple can become pregnant by a man. The other half of the lesbian couple has no relation or obligation to the child fathered by somebody lse.
Click to expand...

So this lesbian couple, when they make promises to each other and have a baby by artificial insemination, then split up, by your way of thinking the one that didn't have the baby gets off scot free?
 
charver said:
What about if the fertilised egg of lesbian A were implanted into lesbian B to produce a child - let's call it C as that seems appropriate?

One has a genetic link and the other carried little C for 9 months. Relation and obligation, no?
Click to expand...

What about it? Would depend on the contractual arrangement between the egg donor and surrogate mother. Any marriage would not be relevant to the parental rights.
 
WinterBorn said:
So this lesbian couple, when they make promises to each other and have a baby by artificial insemination, then split up, by your way of thinking the one that didn't have the baby gets off scot free?
Click to expand...

Nothing in marriage law that would obligate her. If she adopted the kid, the adoption would obligate her. And of course they can create any contractual agreement they like.
 
dixon76710 said:
Yes it is. Right there in the sentence before the one you want me to read. NOWHERE do they advocate for marriage for all because they only advocate for marriage for "gays".
Click to expand...

Would gays get any marriage advantages that a heterosexual couple wouldn't get?
 
WinterBorn said:
Well.....except a platonic couple is that way by choice. The gay couple is like that because legally, they have no options.
Click to expand...

???? Whether a couple is platonic or sexual is a choice. And states have laws that annul or dissolve platonic marriages for a failure to consummate. Although these laws havent yet been tested in states with same sex marriage. All the common law rules on consummation would be an akward fit in the case of two people of the same sex.
 
WinterBorn said:
Its funny, you think giving a gay couple the same benefits as straight couples is "special treatment".
Click to expand...

Because it is. Marriage is extended to heterosexual couples because they have the capacity to procreate. Platonic couples, closely related couples and gay couples do not procreate. Extending marriage to only gays even though they dont procreate is SPECIAL treatment for gays because they are gay.
 
cawacko said:
Would gays get any marriage advantages that a heterosexual couple wouldn't get?
Click to expand...

They would get advantages that my brother and I would be denied. Advantages that the single mother down the street who has been raising her kids with her mother, the kids grandmother, for the 9 years Ive been here. Nothing special about being gay that would warrant such special treatment for gays, denied to my brother and I, the mother and grandmother down the street, or ANY TWO CONSENTING adults who could benefit from the advantages of marriage. You people dont like marriage limited to heterosexual couples but can present no justification for limiting it to sexual couples.

You people whine about equal rights when you are only concerned with advancing the gay agenda. What more evidence do you need than the ridiculous libertarian platform of advocating both for the extension of marriage to homosexuals AND the elimination of marriage.
 
Last edited:
This is Solitary's all-too-typical straw man tactic. "Laws against" supposedly means "ban". We have laws against pollution, yet people are still allowed to drive cars and fart. Now he can't man-up and prove his accusation. :)
 
dixon76710 said:
They would get advantages that my brother and I would be denied. Advantages that the single mother down the street who has been raising her kids with her mother, the kids grandmother, for the 9 years Ive been here. Nothing special about being gay that would warrant such special treatment for gays, denied to my brother and I, the mother and grandmother down the street, or ANY TWO CONSENTING adults who could benefit from the advantages of marriage. You people dont like marriage limited to heterosexual couples but can present no justification for limiting it to sexual couples.

You people whine about equal rights when you are only concerned with advancing the gay agenda. What more evidence do you need than the ridiculous libertarian platform of advocating both for the extension of marriage to homosexuals AND the elimination of marriage.
Click to expand...

They get the same benefits as straight couples. We are not talking about friends, brothers, or single parents. The issue is marriage. And there is no legitimate reason why gays can't marry and get the same benefits. Married couple provide some benefit to our society, or so the claim goes, and so they get a benefit in return. Gay couples provide every benefitto society except unassisted childbirth, and that is not something we should be paying people for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top