Ron Paul for... Vice President?

S

SisterMaryElephant

Active Member
UncleBuck said:
you claim you're not anti-gay, but you think that gays being able to marry the person of their choice is a "special right".

please reconcile.
Click to expand...
I already did, you're just not very bright. There's no need to redefine marriage, that would be a special right. They should be able to enter into civil unions and have teh same benefits as a married couple.
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
SisterMaryElephant said:
I've never said that RP was wrong about EVERYTHING, there are things he says that a lot of people agree with, just not enough to elect a nut-job bigot like him... :D
Click to expand...
.
You just got done saying that he is an anti-gay bigot. Now your pedaling backwards. Could it not be true that you have not given Ron Paul a fair chance and have made up your mind before hand?

I think this is clear demonstration of that..
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
sync0s said:
How can I answer when I don't think it's wrong at all?

You'll have to ask someone else who truly has that opinion.
Click to expand...
my bad. i was wrong.

you defended the concept of "i think homosexuality is wrong", you never claimed to think that way. my mistake.

i'll move on to asking someone who actually thinks that way then.
 
S

SisterMaryElephant

Active Member
UncleBuck said:
you never answered my questions.

you've never seen any proof that people are born gay, you say. have you ever seen proof that someone is born straight? when did you decide to be straight, if i may ask?
Click to expand...
I did answer. You asked "why are you against someone being born with a certain sexual orientation? why are you against someone choosing a certain sexual orientation?"

I said that I'm NOT against people being gay but that there's no proof that they're born that way. It's possible that some are but it's not for certain. They can choose whatever they like.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
SisterMaryElephant said:
I already did, you're just not very bright. There's no need to redefine marriage, that would be a special right. They should be able to enter into civil unions and have teh same benefits as a married couple.
Click to expand...
"redefine marriage"...LOL. redefine it for the Nth time, you mean?

are you so unfamiliar with history as to make the claim that marriage has only ever been one thing?

consult the 14th amendment to our constitution and get back to me.
 
S

SisterMaryElephant

Active Member
sync0s said:
That may be the intent, but to call it something other than marriage is by default making it not marriage. Therefore, a homosexual still cannot get married so the law would still be unequal.
Click to expand...
Not true, not even close. Marriage is between a man and a woman. A civil union could be between m/m f/f m/f.

The law is equal because a gay man can marry a woman just like a straight man can but redefining it attempts to make it a special right.
 
S

SisterMaryElephant

Active Member
UncleBuck said:
my bad. i was wrong.

you defended the concept of "i think homosexuality is wrong", you never claimed to think that way. my mistake.

i'll move on to asking someone who actually thinks that way then.
Click to expand...
Desperate much?

The law is equal because a gay man can marry a woman just like a straight man can but redefining it attempts to make it a special right.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
SisterMaryElephant said:
I did answer. You asked "why are you against someone being born with a certain sexual orientation? why are you against someone choosing a certain sexual orientation?"

I said that I'm NOT against people being gay but that there's no proof that they're born that way. It's possible that some are but it's not for certain. They can choose whatever they like.
Click to expand...
it seems as though i have found two people who claim there is nothing wrong with being anti-gay (without prompting), but when asked this series of questions deny having the attitude they defended.

odd. but if you say you are not against gays, i'll move on.

when did you choose to be straight?
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
SisterMaryElephant said:
Not true, not even close. Marriage is between a man and a woman. A civil union could be between m/m f/f m/f.

The law is equal because a gay man can marry a woman just like a straight man can but redefining it attempts to make it a special right.
Click to expand...
So a man and a female can get a civil union, but a man and a man (for instance) can't get married?

How in the world is that equality?
 
sync0s

sync0s

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
it seems as though i have found two people who claim there is nothing wrong with being anti-gay (without prompting), but when asked this series of questions deny having the attitude they defended.

odd. but if you say you are not against gays, i'll move on.

when did you choose to be straight?
Click to expand...
Hey now, not fair.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
SisterMaryElephant said:
The law is equal because a gay man can marry a woman just like a straight man can but redefining it attempts to make it a special right.
Click to expand...
say, it appears michele bachmann has stopped by! welcome, michelle. say hi to marcus for me, and be sure to thank him for the impeccable fabric selection.

you are looking at this in a ridiculous fashion. what you say is akin to saying that blacks were free people during slavery, as long as they painted themselves white.

a straight person can marry the partner of their choice. a gay person may not. how is that equal?
 
S

SisterMaryElephant

Active Member
sync0s said:
So a man and a female can get a civil union, but a man and a man (for instance) can't get married?

How in the world is that equality?
Click to expand...
You still don't get it, it's equal because gays and strights would have the same benefits without having to redefine marriage. Would you feel better if only gay people coudl get a civil union?
 
S

SisterMaryElephant

Active Member
UncleBuck said:
say, it appears michele bachmann has stopped by! welcome, michelle. say hi to marcus for me, and be sure to thank him for the impeccable fabric selection.

you are looking at this in a ridiculous fashion. what you say is akin to saying that blacks were free people during slavery, as long as they painted themselves white.

a straight person can marry the partner of their choice. a gay person may not. how is that equal?
Click to expand...
Is that what you've been reduced to? Michelle Bachmann?

That's completely moronic. It's not the same thing at all.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
sync0s said:
So a man and a female can get a civil union, but a man and a man (for instance) can't get married?

How in the world is that equality?
Click to expand...
my thoughts exactly.

sistermary says anyone can get a civil union, gays and straights. but only straights can get marriage.

how that matches the definition of equality is beyond me, but i am stuck with this damn human logic.

i have not achieved vulcan status yet.
 
S

SisterMaryElephant

Active Member
UncleBuck said:
my thoughts exactly.

sistermary says anyone can get a civil union, gays and straights. but only straights can get marriage.

how that matches the definition of equality is beyond me, but i am stuck with this damn human logic.

i have not achieved vulcan status yet.
Click to expand...
If only you had logic instead of emotional fallacy...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top