How to decide which instances of opposition to gay marriage are hateful and bigoted.

[Polycarp]

Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers

If they let the bivalves have the word "clam", soon seafood lovers everywhere, especially poor defenseless helpless idiotic children, will be confused into thinking being bi is normal. Hence the traditional usage of "clam" must be preserved.

And now it becomes clear why both shellfish and gay sex are proscribed in Torah. (Involvement of multiple cockles should have been a clue.)

[DrFidelius]

It all makes sense now. Tattooed gay shellfish wearing mixed fibers would be like the trifecta of abominations.

[Trinopus]

Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers

. . . Anyway, I note magellan cannot (or at least has not) offered up any other words that have needed dictionary-defense. As always, his is a general argument that applies to exactly one specific instance.

One! ONE specific instance!

Well, that's lame...

[SCAdian]

Originally Posted by Miller

The controversy around Cathy erupted precisely because he was donating very large amounts of money to translate his beliefs into policy.

Really? Then why is this the first time I've heard about his donations? None of the complaints I've heard or read were about his donations - they were about his words.

[Miller]

Originally Posted by SCAdian

Really? Then why is this the first time I've heard about his donations?

Because you're not very attentive?

[Marley23]

Cathy's words were spoken in response to a question about his company's donations. I admit I wasn't personally familiar with Chick-Fil-A's practices until recently, but plenty of other people were.

[martu]

Originally Posted by Marley23

You're not allowed to insult people this way in Great Debates. I'm giving you a warning for this one; don't do it again.

Can you help me to understand this warning please? ATMB thread here http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=665136

Thanks.

[martu]

Originally Posted by Marley23

You're not allowed to insult people this way in Great Debates. I'm giving you a warning for this one; don't do it again.

magellan01 I apologise for the insult which wasn't intended as an insult though I can see, after discussion in ATMB, it is most likely to be interpreted as one. Apologies also to the board for lowering the tone in GD.

[42fish]

Originally Posted by magellan01

I am for equality for homosexuals. As some already know, I fully support extending them every right and privilege one can imagine—except the use of the word "marriage". I am not against gay people. ...

Unfortunately, as it turns out, a good part of the gay community is less interested in the legal rights and privileges they've been pining for than trying to alter society in a way that makes them feel good. We've moved from cries for toleration to acceptance and, now, to "you must embrace us".

Man, it's just like back in the 50s when I demonstrated my support for equality by demanding that the 'colored' water fountains be upgraded until they were just as nice as the 'white' ones. Yet those Negroes insisted that wasn't enough and claimed I was somehow bigotted. Such madness!

[Miller]

Originally Posted by DrFidelius

It all makes sense now. Tattooed gay shellfish wearing mixed fibers would be like the trifecta of abominations.

A BBC reenactment of magellan's concerns.