Hence the need for regulations, similar to HOA rules against grue and bleen color schemes.
A priori means before the thing is even considered.
Tell me what this is, please, in your own words:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Peace-Dollar-1-oz-999-Copper-Coin-FREE-Wheat-Back-/121307649056
and how does it differ from this:
It’s a random coin for sale on ebay, surely.
Are you guys still* at it?
haven’t you realized by now that Melchior is like a 6 year-old in the grocery store who wants his mom to buy a chocolate rabbit the size of his head.
Repeated rational arguments regarding the fact that it will spoil his appetite, ruin his teeth, and costs too much will be met with the unassailable rebuttal of “BUT I WANT IT!!!”.
Similarly no rational argument is going to shake Melchor from responding “BUT IT ISN’T a MARRIAGE!!!”
At this point rather than arguing its time to take the child by the hand and drag him out of the store ignoring his pleas.
Its a free country and if Melchor wants to say that all of the marriages that are enjoyed by loving couples around him he’s free to do so, much in the same way that Abraham Simpson free to refuse to recognize Missori. Meanwhile the rest of us can move on and live in the real world.
*I admit that I skipped pages 9-17 but I doubt I missed much.
One is silver, one is copper. And the copper one is from 2012. So what?.
No.
And if a thing is true a posteriori, then clearly it cannot be false a priori.
There are places where gay people can get married. And where those marriages have occurred, they are functionally equivalent to marriages between straight people. You might believe that such unions is ill-advised or wrong, but you cannot argue that they are impossible A PRIORI, because demonstrably they’re not.
Quibbling and saying such unions aren’t “real marriages” is stupid. If they are enforced by law and recognized by the community then they are real marriages. The only reason you don’t understand this point is because you don’t know dick about how language actually works.
One is accepted by the general population as currency and the other is not. As with words, the value of coins is determined by group consensus. If everyone thinks a coin is worth a dollar, then it’s worth a dollar (or much more). If people don’t, then it’s worthless. (As the German government in the 1930’s discovered.)
If the general population accepts gay marriage as marriage, then it IS marriage. There is no other standard that must be met.
Do the words ‘genuine’ and ‘counterfeit’, ‘real’ and ‘imitation’, come to mind?
So… every single one of your posts? Because lemme tell you, there doesn’t seem to be much consideration contained therein.
No they are not ‘immoral’ or ‘wrong’ (that is a stupid argument, albeit unfortunately a popular one): they are not real marriages at all, just like the imitation 1921 peace dollar made of copper with the original obverse design is not a ‘real’ 1921 peace dollar. It’s an imitation, a fake, a phony, a sham.
Most of us have given up trying to present actual arguments. He ignores those and simply reposts the same ridiculous “but that’s not what I believe, so it can’t be true!” crap. So at this point, we’re just ridiculing him and pulling his strings.
Actually, they are real marriages. They fit the dictionary definitions (from the latest editions of all the dictionary makers), they fit common usage of the word, and they fit the legal requirements in many states.
So you are incorrect. Again.
‘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 is amusing to see him doing the gay marriage equivalent of commanding the tide to stop.
Is your argument seriously that language is immutable, and once a concept is defined it is fixed that way forever? Because, yeah, that’s not how language works. Words do not have any inherent, a priori meaning.
That the current consensus is that marriage is not bound by gender or sex. Because that’s what lexicographers do: record the actual usage of words by actual people. Earlier dictionaries reveal the meanings people of those eras imputed to words and future dictionaries will demonstrate a similar slice of that future time.
LOL. The obvious difference is functional. You can’t spend counterfeit money. But a gay marriage grants exactly the same rights and privileges as an opposite sex marriage. It is functionally equivalent. “Counterfeit” money that you can legally spend isn’t really counterfeit, is it?
You really are shockingly ignorant of how the world works.
You’re completely nuts.