The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Re: Same Sex Marriage

Re: Same Sex Marriage
Posted by pancho (Moderator) - Saturday, December 17 2011, 23:06:53 (UTC)
from *** - *** Commercial - Windows XP - Mozilla
Website:
Website title:

Arrow wrote:
>Last comment on this subject. By the way, I was arguing neither against gay marriage nor against multiple marriages.

...you are neither for or against anything...you just like to take sides and play with yourself.


You assumed that on your own!

..this is a discussion forum...so we discuss....people tend to discuss things they care about...you are a new kind of presence...you just like noise.


I simply asked if one thing might lead (or form a basis for an argument) to another. I did not explicitly object or oppose that thing or the other.

...sure you did. We're not looking for a "basis for argument"...we're looking for discussion and ideas...like Aquinas you like counting angels on pinheads.
>
> Multiple marriages are already illegal in America...we're not talking about things illegal...we're talking about a LEGAL right open only to some Americans...
>
>… it isn't defined in ANY legal document to date...nowhere has it ever had to say marriage is between a man and a woman
>
>You have not commented on my premises.

...your "premises" is your boredom. Apparently you have nothing better to do than take sides in arguments you don't believe in...what's the point? You are playing games...we are trying to discuss....come back when you find something to believe in.


You simply repeated what you previously said several times. Here they are again (read it all first before you reply):

...and you consistently dodge the answer to your, apparently, single belief...that all religions are the same. If you believe that, then we have a basis for refuting you with facts, not opinions but facts...if you don't believe it, then why do you expect serious answers to your non-questions?
>
>Argument for gay marriage on the basis that marriage is a contract:
>
>A. Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract.
>B. A contract is an agreement between different parties regardless of their gender.
>
>= Therefore, marriage can be made between two parties regardless of their gender.
>
> If gay marriage is legalized on this basis, then multiple marriages can also be argued for because:
>
>A. Marriage is nothing more than a legal contract.
>B. A contract is an agreement between two or more parties.

...Jesus...how infantile can you be? Maybe this is what comes of not believing anything,,,,it's like not focusing on an object, naturally you miss it's nuances and details. Anything "can be argued"...I'm not interested in that game. Anything can become legal at any time...if polygamy were legalized it wouldn't be because of Gay marriage....and if it were legalized...so what?
>
>= Therefore, marriage can be made between two or more parties.

...absurd...but go ahead.
>
> However, you are saying that gay marriage should be legalized (or is already legal) simply because:
>
>A. The law defines marriage as a union between two citizens
>B. The law does not explicitly specify that the two citizens must be of different genders
>
>= Therefore, the law does not bar two citizens of the same gender from marrying.

...there is no law yet...there is only custom and tradition...I said this long ago. People like you WANT there to be a law against Gay marriage, but you're having a hard time of it because your games and warnings and arguments are all invalid in a court of law....anyone passing such a law will eventually wind up in court at which point it will be tossed out as unConstitutional.
>
>This is called a loophole... and that's it.

...one more time...there is no law on the books right now defining marriage as only between a man and a woman...therefore there can be no loophole to a law that doesn't exist. Do we really need to go through this? I am extending you the courtesy of treating you as an adult with ideas and beliefs....keep this up and I'll simply ignore you or worse, insult you.



---------------------


The full topic:



***



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9