[Pseudonym]

How do you determine that there is a "right" to state-sponsored marriage?

[kenmore]

Pseudonym wrote:

I contest your assumption that homosexuals are not being treated as equal citizens. Upon what grounds do you believe this?

Oh.. maybe the fact that they have to fight for everything.. they are and have been discriminated against.. if they were treated equally, there wouldn't be the marriage issue... or they wouldn't lose jobs because a school board discovered their sexuality.. no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!

[2Cdo]

kenmore wrote:

no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!

But you see it so using your logic you must be gay! Does your wife know about this? Or is this done on the sly?

[mapleleafs]

I don't think homosexuals should have to defend themselves anymore than heterosexuals. Everyone keeps crying the plea of "tradition" and "sacred." If you really want to delve into the history of marriage, it was a property right. Your wife was your property. That evolved into something, obviously, more meaningful. Why wouldn't I say there is a "right" for state-sponsored marriage? You just made the assertion that gays are equal... no, they are not. It's completely evident and to dispute otherwise is arrogant. You can argue religion till you're blue in the balls, but religion is way more of a choice than homosexuality.

[2Cdo]

Just to show not all conservatives are heartless bastards. I could care less one way or another about gay marriage. It doesn't make my marriage any better or worse, in fact it doesn't affect me in any way.

If gays want to be as miserable as us married heterosexuals, more power to them!

[kenmore]

2Cdo wrote:

kenmore wrote:

no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!

But you see it so using your logic you must be gay! Does your wife know about this? Or is this done on the sly?

no i am not.. but be careful.. i got warnings for mentioning someones sexuality..

[ziggy]

Wow,and I allways thought everyone was equal.

[Pseudonym]

kenmore wrote:

Oh.. maybe the fact that they have to fight for everything.. they are and have been discriminated against.. if they were treated equally, there wouldn't be the marriage issue... or they wouldn't lose jobs because a school board discovered their sexuality.. no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!

Perhaps I should be clear that I am not discussing "mean" treatment by other individuals. I am talking about equal treatment as citizens under the law.

And since I am a single white male, I guess I should not attempt to discuss issues of marriage, sexuality, or race ever again, since I don't have "empathy" with those situations. Actual principles don't apply ever.

[kenmore]

apparently not on this site.. right?

[Pseudonym]

mapleleafs wrote:

I don't think homosexuals should have to defend themselves anymore than heterosexuals. Everyone keeps crying the plea of "tradition" and "sacred." If you really want to delve into the history of marriage, it was a property right. Your wife was your property. That evolved into something, obviously, more meaningful. Why wouldn't I say there is a "right" for state-sponsored marriage? You just made the assertion that gays are equal... no, they are not. It's completely evident and to dispute otherwise is arrogant. You can argue religion till you're blue in the balls, but religion is way more of a choice than homosexuality.

I have yet to bring religion into the argument. Would you like me to? I was assuming I was arguing with an individual who did not agree with me on basic religious truths.

[2Cdo]

kenmore wrote:

2Cdo wrote:

kenmore wrote:

no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!

But you see it so using your logic you must be gay! Does your wife know about this? Or is this done on the sly?

no i am not.. but be careful.. i got warnings for mentioning someones sexuality..

You got warned for mentioning someones sexuality or ridiculing it? Merely mentioning something should not be grounds for a warning.

[mapleleafs]

Pseudonym wrote:

kenmore wrote:

Oh.. maybe the fact that they have to fight for everything.. they are and have been discriminated against.. if they were treated equally, there wouldn't be the marriage issue... or they wouldn't lose jobs because a school board discovered their sexuality.. no surprise that you wouldn't be able to see it .. your not gay!

Perhaps I should be clear that I am not discussing "mean" treatment by other individuals. I am talking about equal treatment as citizens under the law.

And since I am a single white male, I guess I should not attempt to discuss issues of marriage, sexuality, or race ever again, since I don't have "empathy" with those situations. Actual principles don't apply ever.

Ever read Blink from Malcolm Gladwell?

I don't know, you mentioned the "single white male" thing - I think you'd find the book interesting.

[kenmore]

Pseudonym wrote:

mapleleafs wrote:

I don't think homosexuals should have to defend themselves anymore than heterosexuals. Everyone keeps crying the plea of "tradition" and "sacred." If you really want to delve into the history of marriage, it was a property right. Your wife was your property. That evolved into something, obviously, more meaningful. Why wouldn't I say there is a "right" for state-sponsored marriage? You just made the assertion that gays are equal... no, they are not. It's completely evident and to dispute otherwise is arrogant. You can argue religion till you're blue in the balls, but religion is way more of a choice than homosexuality.

I have yet to bring religion into the argument. Would you like me to? I was assuming I was arguing with an individual who did not agree with me on basic religious truths.

no! keep that to your self thanks..

[mapleleafs]

Pseudonym wrote:

mapleleafs wrote:

I don't think homosexuals should have to defend themselves anymore than heterosexuals. Everyone keeps crying the plea of "tradition" and "sacred." If you really want to delve into the history of marriage, it was a property right. Your wife was your property. That evolved into something, obviously, more meaningful. Why wouldn't I say there is a "right" for state-sponsored marriage? You just made the assertion that gays are equal... no, they are not. It's completely evident and to dispute otherwise is arrogant. You can argue religion till you're blue in the balls, but religion is way more of a choice than homosexuality.

I have yet to bring religion into the argument. Would you like me to? I was assuming I was arguing with an individual who did not agree with me on basic religious truths.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean YOU in particular. I generalized that as most people's basis for the argument is religion.

[Pseudonym]

ziggy wrote:

Wow,and I allways thought everyone was equal.

This has never been true ever. Individuals have always been unique. Equal protection under the law is the fundamental principle that has been corrupted in many of these cases.