# Anti-SSM argument goes from stupid to... what the heck is this?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819
**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:** 8
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/141 "2014-04-11T14:49:55Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> I don’t oppose such things. I think they were fine then and should be fine now. I simply wanted to make the point that some people are very selective about citing precedent: they cite it as support only when it is convenient and consonant with their point of view. Otherwise, they say ‘well this is the 21st century’. You cannot have it both ways!
The real point – which I guess nobody’s technically spelled out in this thread, but nobody should _have_ to – is that some changes away from how-it-used-to-be are for the better, and some are for the worse, and so whether it’s a custom is _irrelevant_. Some customs are awesome and should be kept. Some customs are awful and should be discarded.
The question isn’t whether it’s a custom, but whether it’s a good custom or a bad one, compared to the merits of the proposed alternative.
Ask: _if we scrap this custom, why not also scrap the one against murder?_ Lo and behold, people will _tell_ you what’s praiseworthy about an anti-murder custom; they won’t just stammer awkwardly and say _well, it’s a custom, and therefore must be great_.
That it’s a custom is trivia; that it’s a _good_ custom is worth mentioning.
So if I ask someone why marriage should be limited to members of the opposite sex, and their only answer is “custom” – well, look, that’s irrelevant trivia; is it one of the good customs, or one of the bad ones? Don’t just tell me that it would be “a” change; some changes would be improvements. _Is this one of them?_
---
### Author:  [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/142 "2014-04-11T14:50:32Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#):
>
> That is untrue. SSM isn’t being forced upon anyone; no one is being obliged to marry any person of his or her own sex. The legalization of SSM only serves to ALLOW people who wish to marry a person of their own choice to do so. Claiming otherwise is like claiming that, by making chocolate cake for dessert tonight, I am forcing my brother who lives three states away to break his diet.
Well, if one doesn’t want to provide flowers, bake a wedding cake, or photograph the ceremony, participating in SSM may very well be forced upon one. The bullying pendulum has now swung both ways, and liberty dies, to thundrous applause.
That said, Melchoir is not helping. Maybe Balthazar and Gaspar can chime in.
---
### Author:  [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/143 "2014-04-11T14:57:33Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> No at all. Tradition refers to customs, not beliefs. Believing that the sun revolves around the earth is not a tradition or custom.
That is not true. Beliefs are, in fact, traditional, and studied as such by folklorists and anthropologists.
Of course, I’m a man who is married to a man, so you’re probably a bit creeped out that I’m even talking to you.
Think how much more creeped out you’re be if you knew that my husband and I break into your house at night to lick your teaspoons.
And pee in your shower.
And… wait, this is a family message board. Never mind. Um, you might want to wash your towels. Use the hot water setting.
---
### Author:  [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/144 "2014-04-11T15:04:31Z")
**Melchior** , do you honestly expect semantics and wordplay to convince homosexuals that they shouldn’t be allowed to marry the people they love? How do you see that working, in your mind? Do you expect them to say, “Well, I \*thought \*I wanted to marry my partner… but since homosexual marriage is a logical impossibility, I guess we’ll just have to be satisfied with living in sin for the rest of ours lives”?
---
### Author:  [@oft\_wears\_hats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/oft_wears_hats)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/145 "2014-04-11T15:04:42Z")
In this thread of nearly 150 posts, there have been maybe 10 or 20 that actually address the OP.
When is the last time we had a thread about same-sex marriage that **Melchior** didn’t hijack? I’m guessing sometime before February of this year. If we ignore him, he might not go away, but at least we can continue to have discussions about SSM that go beyond “does it exist or not?”
On topic:
So anti-SSM people in Utah are trying to distance themselves from the toxic study, but they don’t actually have another study to support their position that “SSM is bad for families?” So this seems like desperate damage control. I can’t imagine it’s going to go well for the anti-SSM folks. Has a decision been rendered by the 10th Circuit Court or are the proceedings still in progress?
---
### Author:  [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/146 "2014-04-11T15:13:40Z")
It’s a hijack, sure, but it lets us getting some mocking in, like batting practice.
---
### Author:  [@Melchior](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melchior)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/147 "2014-04-11T15:14:32Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#):
>
> The real point – which I guess nobody’s technically spelled out in this thread, but nobody should _have_ to – is that some changes away from how-it-used-to-be are for the better, and some are for the worse, and so whether it’s a custom is _irrelevant_. Some customs are awesome and should be kept. Some customs are awful and should be discarded.
Says who?
> [@](#):
>
> The question isn’t whether it’s a custom, but whether it’s a good custom or a bad one, compared to the merits of the proposed alternative.
According to whom?
> [@](#):
>
> Ask: _if we scrap this custom, why not also scrap the one against murder?_ Lo and behold, people will _tell_ you what’s praiseworthy about an anti-murder custom; they won’t just stammer awkwardly and say _well, it’s a custom, and therefore must be great_.
>
> That it’s a custom is trivia; that it’s a _good_ custom is worth mentioning.
Says who?
> [@](#):
>
> So if I ask someone why marriage should be limited to members of the opposite sex, and their only answer is “custom” – well, look, that’s irrelevant trivia; is it one of the good customs, or one of the bad ones? Don’t just tell me that it would be “a” change; some changes would be improvements. _Is this one of them?_
\*All \*of culture is custom, every last shred of it.
---
### Author:  [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/148 "2014-04-11T15:14:36Z")
> [@FriarTed](#):
>
> Well, if one doesn’t want to provide flowers, bake a wedding cake, or photograph the ceremony, participating in SSM may very well be forced upon one. The bullying pendulum has now swung both ways, and liberty dies, to thundrous applause.
>
> That said, Melchoir is not helping. Maybe Balthazar and Gaspar can chime in.
Ah, discrimination and bigotry. Two values the Christian faith was built on.
Does your photographer refuse to photograph second/third weddings? Are the baby pictures only of children born of a Christian marriage? Is a priest and minister available for Confession so all subjects are free of sin?
Maybe if this is done, the photographer might have a legitimate point.
You open a business to the public, you serve the public.
---
### Author:  [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/149 "2014-04-11T15:17:32Z")
**jsgoddess** , you owe \*\*Melchior \*\*some flowers. This thread would have died in about 10 posts if not for him.
---
### Author:  [@Melchior](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melchior)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/150 "2014-04-11T15:18:23Z")
> [@Lightnin](#):
>
> **Melchior** , do you honestly expect semantics and wordplay to convince homosexuals that they shouldn’t be allowed to marry the people they love? How do you see that working, in your mind? Do you expect them to say, “Well, I \*thought \*I wanted to marry my partner… but since homosexual marriage is a logical impossibility, I guess we’ll just have to be satisfied with living in sin for the rest of ours lives”?
Love has nothing to do with it. Examine the history of marriage. Most marriages historically have been arranged. Look it up.
---
### Author:  [@Double\_Foolscap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Double_Foolscap)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/151 "2014-04-11T15:20:33Z")
**Melchior** , what’s your opinion on divorced people being able to get married again?
---
### Author:  [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/152 "2014-04-11T15:22:31Z")
Wow, three more pages of ‘it’s not a marriage because I said so.’
---
### Author:  [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/153 "2014-04-11T15:23:38Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#):
>
> And the argument comes full circle back to stupid.
Now there’s something that _is_ logically impossible, inasmuch as something cannot “return to” a place when it was never elsewhere to begin with.
---
### Author:  [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/154 "2014-04-11T15:26:39Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> No, it is the _meaning of the word_, which is unassailable.
Just in case somebody does try assailing my meaning, I took the precaution of putting lots of soft cushions at the bottom of my wall.
---
### Author:  [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/155 "2014-04-11T15:29:21Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> Says who?
>
> According to whom?
>
> Says who?
>
> \*All \*of culture is custom, every last shred of it.
A new standard of persuasive argument
---
### Author:  [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/156 "2014-04-11T15:29:59Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> It isn’t marriage at all. It doesn’t need to be ‘banned’ because it’s impossible, just as a square circle is impossible, by definition. It’s a joke. And don’t tell me you can redefine ‘square’ and ‘circle’!
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> That is the best possible argument.
**Melchior** has already admitted that his best possible argument is simply sticking his fingers in his ears and pretending SSM doesn’t exist because he doesn’t want it to. This is so far from any kind of logical argument that a rebuttal is pointless. And he’s not going to come up with anything else no matter how much we prod him. The anti-SSM folks are tilting at windmills with their arguments against it, but we’re doing the same thing trying to have a logical debate with someone who is so obviously not interested in a good-faith argument.
Seriously, he doesn’t understand why it is valid to question if a custom is good? Even more astounding, he doesn’t understand who would ever do such a thing?
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/157 "2014-04-11T15:30:00Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> 40,000 years of human history means less than a judge acting alone? What the fuck gives him the right to do that? It’s complete insanity. Everybody ‘knows’ what marriage is, and you cannot change the meanings of words just to suit the wishes of idiots.
I’ll be sure to let my wife know that she is now my property, has no rights other than those I see fit to grant, and that her parents owe me a dowry. After all, we can’t go around redefining marriage.
I’m sure she’ll take the news well when I point out that it’s supported by 40,000 years of human history (and hopefully she won’t point out that recorded history only goes back about 6,000 years.)
---
### Author:  [@Melchior](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melchior)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/158 "2014-04-11T15:30:29Z")
> [@Double\_Foolscap](#):
>
> **Melchior** , what’s your opinion on divorced people being able to get married again?
Some people never learn.
:rolleyes:
---
### Author:  [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/159 "2014-04-11T15:31:22Z")
> [@Marley23](#):
>
> Wow, three more pages of ‘it’s not a marriage because I said so.’
“Pages” means paper, and has always meant that. “Web page” is meaningless and impossible
---
### Author:  [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)
#### Post date: [April 11, 2014, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819/160 "2014-04-11T15:31:25Z")
> [@Melchior](#):
>
> Some people never learn.
>
> :rolleyes:
I have proof!
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819.md?page=7)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-ssm-argument-goes-from-stupid-to-what-the-heck-is-this/685819.md?page=9)