# Anti-SSM argument goes from stupid to... what the heck is this? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 10, 2014, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819 "2014-04-10T19:53:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 47
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/921 "2014-04-15T17:22:16Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > This is one of those threads where I seriously have to question why anybody continues to engage this dumb-ass motherfucker. I called troll on page 2, and nothing he’s posted since has convinced me otherwise. I know, Poe’s Law and everything, but I still can’t believe he’s serious - using the most cartoonish parodies of anti-SSM arguments and refusing to even give the impression that he comprehends the counter-arguments doesn’t shout out “sincere but misguided” to me . Even **magellan01** sounds rational by comparison. This has got to be the most pointless thread currently going on the boards. I’m assuming that he’ll be banned soon enough. I will admit, I was interested in the original point of this thread and I wouldn’t mind seeing the discussion swing back thataways. ---
**Author:** ![Melchior](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Melchior](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melchior)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/922 "2014-04-15T17:27:36Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I’m assuming that he’ll be banned soon enough. I will admit, I was interested in the original point of this thread and I wouldn’t mind seeing the discussion swing back thataways. For what? being the \*only \*person who does not resort to ad hominem arguments, vulgar name-calling, and insults? ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/923 "2014-04-15T17:38:12Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > For what? being the \*only \*person who does not resort to ad hominem arguments, vulgar name-calling, and insults? For what? Probably for being a lying piece of shit who refuses to argue honestly, dismisses every rational point made against him, bastardizes the English language to meet his fucked-in-the-head notions, and claims he’s right with no other proof than “because I say so”. But other than that you’re a great guy, I mean, apart from the being a complete douche-bag thing. ---
**Author:** ![Melchior](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Melchior](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melchior)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/924 "2014-04-15T17:54:08Z")
> [@zoid](#): > > For what? > > Probably for being a lying piece of shit who refuses to argue honestly, dismisses every rational point made against him, bastardizes the English language to meet his fucked-in-the-head notions, and claims he’s right with no other proof than “because I say so”. > > But other than that you’re a great guy, I mean, apart from the being a complete douche-bag thing. But so far I have not seen a single good argument. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/925 "2014-04-15T17:55:03Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > No, you miss my point, again. Read and understand. What year is it? 2014, not 1921. For it to be a ‘real’ 1921 silver peace dollar, it has to have been: > > 1. made in 1921 > 2. composed of the silver alloy > 3. be of the ‘peace’ design > > Not one of these things has anything whatsoever to do with ‘agreement’! > > The copper is a fake, is not made of silver alloy, and was not made in 1921. Is it really that difficult for you to grasp this distinction, that the copper piece just _looks like_ the 1921 silver dollar? that it is a \*fake \*1921 peace dollar? It’s still a “real dollar” if it is being treated as such, just as in the same way as “marriage” is. I don’t understand why you would analogize something as specific as a “1921 silver peace dollar” with “marriage” when “dollar” is the obvious analog. Furthermore, you are begging the question, if your intent is to analogize “counterfeit 1921 silver peace dollar” with “same sex-marriage.” You are presupposing that same-sex marriage is “counterfeit” or “fake.” So where does that 1943 nickel fit into your vocabulary? A nickel, by the very word itself, should contain nickel, shouldn’t it? Would you say the 1943 nickels are not real nickels? Sure they are, unless you are some uber-pedantic hyperliteralist who views language and words as an immutable construct. They were used as such, valued at five cents, and referred to as such in the language. The fact that they were not actually made of nickel is irrelevant. They were still nickels. ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/926 "2014-04-15T17:55:36Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > But so far I have not seen a single good argument. Funny enough, I believe we’d all say the same about your posts. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/927 "2014-04-15T17:56:25Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > But so far I have not seen a single good argument. Stat over, at the beginning. You’ll find what you seek. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/928 "2014-04-15T17:59:00Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > But so far I have not seen a single good argument. Well, then; there’s your problem. Threads generally make more sense if you read all the posts, not just your own. ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/929 "2014-04-15T17:59:10Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Stat over, at the beginning. You’ll find what you seek. He means he hasn’t seen an argument that supports his view. He doesn’t want any arguments that contradict his beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/930 "2014-04-15T18:00:32Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > For what? being the \*only \*person who does not resort to ad hominem arguments, vulgar name-calling, and insults? No one has resorted to ad hominems. An ad hominem is when you attempt to discredit an argument by discrediting its arguer. Your. . . arguments do a perfectly competent job of discrediting themselves. The insults to your person are merely for the fun of it and not for purposes of debate. But then, one would have to be at least as smart as a professor to recognize that. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/931 "2014-04-15T18:02:15Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > I’m assuming that he’ll be banned soon enough. Bet you weren’t expecting it this soon! > [@Melchior](#): > > But so far I have not seen a single good argument. I guess you never will. I’d say good luck, but… ---
**Author:** ![Antinor01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecae2f/32.png) [@Antinor01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antinor01)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/932 "2014-04-15T18:02:59Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Bet you weren’t expecting it this soon! > > I guess you never will. I’d say good luck, but… Will you have a cargo cult marriage with me Marley? I think I love you. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/933 "2014-04-15T18:07:22Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > ‘from the latest editions of all the dictionary makers’? what is that supposed to prove? that’s the best argument you have? suppose the dictionary makers were bribed or coerced to make the changes? that proves nothing. It proves that dictionary makers believe that the usage of the word has changed. It certainly proves more than the definition you quoted from a 1961 edition does. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/934 "2014-04-15T18:09:00Z")
Oh. He’s banned. What a shame. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/935 "2014-04-15T18:10:01Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > What supports all laws regarding marriage? Custom and only custom. If you throw this out, then laws against bigamy or marrying your sister or a dog will be subject to the same process, for their foundation is no different. You can’t have it both ways. Does the passage of time in itself invalidate any law? What about laws against murder? Thing is…There is no group of people actively or even passively lobbying, AFAIK, for marriages between siblings or between people and dogs; and no one I can think of wants murder to be legal. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/936 "2014-04-15T18:11:25Z")
He won’t recognize your definition of “banned.” ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/937 "2014-04-15T18:13:46Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > He won’t recognize your definition of “banned.” To be fair, it’s only a cargo cult banning. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/938 "2014-04-15T18:22:35Z")
Damn, this thread has been amusing me while I’m stuck in meetings at work. ---
**Author:** ![zoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zoid/32/336_2.png) [@zoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zoid)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/939 "2014-04-15T18:25:56Z")
He can’t be BANNED because he never had a relationship with the board to begin with. You can call him BANNED, you can even revoke his posting privileges, he’s still not BANNED because that’s not what the word BANNED means (at least to **Mel-I’m-a-fucking-idiot-choir** ) ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [April 15, 2014, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/940 "2014-04-15T18:33:20Z")
> [@42fish](#): > > Clearly you’re unaware of **magellan01** ’s argument that the unspeakably\* horrible effects of gay marriage won’t show up until N years have passed, where N is “undefined, but longer than gay marriage has already existed in any jurisdiction.” > > \*Literally unspeakable, judging from his constant refusal to tell any Dopers what those effects will be, no matter how often he’s asked. Oh, I’ve seen magellan’s claims to that effect. His last estimate, I think, was that the post-SSM-legalization disaster would take 40 years, but the form of this disaster and its early warning signs, he could not describe. Anyway, Melchior never responded to my post #820, and now I guess he never will - at least not under that name. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819.md?page=46) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819.md?page=48)