Of course you’re entitled to vote, and despite the frequency with which this parry is used, I’ve yet to see anyone suggest you be disenfranchised. I personally think it’s ludicrous that equal rights should necessitate a vote in this country, and not be assumed as a given, but such is the state of things. We are still an adolescent society, one that retains many infantile traits. Like infants, many of us are self-absorbed and indifferent to the impact of our behavior on others. We want what we want, be it the biggest slice of cake, or the shinest toy we can show off to our envious friends, but refuse to share.
Nonetheless, I’m hopeful that we’re moving forward, if glacially. A few generations from now, people may look back at this issue, and of the mistreatment of homosexuals in general, and find it as perplexing and embarrassing as we now do the era of Jim Crow, denial of suffrage for women, and other stagnant periods in which the oppressors also wrapped themselves in the stately cloak of the law.
So, how does modifying the meaning of marriage - with this simple, straightforward modification - endanger the foundation of our society or our country? If it doesn’t, then why even bring this up?
Tradition has no qualms with being discriminatory. For centuries, women did not have the right to vote.
The person who argued to prevent women from voting (or allow them to, but only while calling it “woting”) simply because “that’s the way it’s always been”, had an equally ridiculous point of view.
I agree with you about this in the sense that the word has been bastardized as you’ve described. But how bat-shit nutso would I sound if I demanded a constitutional amendment outlawing using the word “hero” to describe anything but what you’ve proscribed above. Further, how pillaried do you think I would be if I protested returning troops from Iraq with a sign that said, “I’m sure not all of you did something heroic”?
So, when can we expect you to start collecting signatures in support of a constitutional amendment to prohibit the use of “hero” when referring to anyone who has been less than classically Heroic? Will your amendment make an exception for “obvious license” such as “hero of the game?” Will vendors of body-building courses have to remove the obligatory “My hero!” frame from any advertising destined for California?
Interesting digression: have you actually read any of the works of Homer? The “heroes” of Greek myths were, by any modern standard, bloody-handed psychopaths who today would have spent their entire lives tranqed up to their eyeballs, if they weren’t strapped into an electric chair and given the ride of their lives.
Just bringing this up as another example of one of those “traditonal” defintions you’re so fond of that, in fact, have significantly changed their meaning over the course of history.
Really? That hasn’t been my experience with you. The two times I can recall tangling with you, you ALWAYS resort to name-calling and insults of the most childish sort when you get angry. If you want to dial down the vitriol, stop calling people shitheads and idiots. I have, at no point, insulted your intelligence or cussed at you, nor even demonized you as you claim. I cannot say the same for you. But like I said, fire away. It just proves that I’m getting to you.
Bullshit. Your civility is not predicated by anything I say. If you want civility, be civil. I have never put words in your mouth. I quoted you back to you. You conceded my points but still resist the inevitable conclusion, the one that everyone reading this thread has drawn from your words: that you’re homophobic but that truth does not fit in with your self-image, so you lash out at the people who are pointing it out. Sorry, but I’m not going to stop doing it just because it makes you mad.
I understand your position. Don’t insist that, because I draw different conclusions about the reasons for your opinion than you want me to, I don’t understand your position. I understand it perfectly. I think it emanates from homophobia. I came to that conclusion by reading hundreds of your posts on the topic. You don’t like that, so you insist that I am a stupid shithead whose self-worth is inexplicably wrapped up in my opinion of you, etc. But the fact is, I have reached my opinion based on the evidence and offered cites to back it up. It is an informed opinion and a valid one.
So, to conclude, yes, I understand your opinion. I think you hold it because you are a homophobe. Deal.
But, forced to choose between an abstract prinicple (which you still have failed to demonstrate will actually benefit or damage society through its adherence or abandonment, beyond your vague opinion) and the protection of a real-life set of legally invoilate rights, your “support” for gay equality is demonstrated to be as solid as a sand castle.
It still amazes me that you don’t see how weak and insubstantial this support actually is. You expect to be respected for wanting equal rights for gays, but this SSM “Rubicon” is founded on nothing more than unjustified fears (“downside to society”? booga-booga-booga!), rose-colored nostalgia, and a loyalty to boilerplate traditions that have “traditionally” excluded many others (of differing races and religions) in the past.
Since you haven’t provided any convincing reason why it is actually Best For Society, then, yes it is simply your comfort in not having your way of thinking challenged–when it represents no tangible loss for you but broad, significant gains for others (gains that you very comfortably take for granted). :sniff: Screw your rights–Won’t someone think of the symbolism???
So like I said, unless someone fashions this perfect “alternate route” that conforms completely to your liking, then your commitment to gay equality is merely lip service, since you’re perfectly comfortable depriving them of those same rights rather than allowing for the possibility that this line-in-the-sand you’ve drawn has nothing but bigoted, mean-spirited, and cruel associations (regardless of how noble your Rubicon righteousness is in your mind).
I just popped in and saw this and will comment on it, and it alone for now. I doubt what you claim is correct. I’m pretty good about responding to people in kind. For instance, look at the difference between how I respond to the idiot toy called levdrakon and Revenant Threshold. So, I’ll have to ask you for cites regarding these insults I’ve hurled at you in this thread so unfairly. Or at all. Please be kind enough to include post numbers so we can see context.
So I got fuck you, shithead, stick your head in a toilet, shove it up your ass. Funny how when someone tells you to shove something up your ass, you threaten to cut their head open, but when you do it to me, it’s totally fucking fine and you claim not to even remember saying it. Hypocritical much? Again, I know this conflicts with your self-image as a rational, civil person debating calmly, but I think this time you have to admit that you’re wrong about yourself. Maybe you’ll think about what else you’re wrong about wrt yourself.
Of course - the vulgarities and and name-calling were posted by your evil twin. Sheesh, my 5-year-old niece is better at plausible deniability than you are.
You’ve addressed me as “idiot” twice. I’ve yet to call you an idiot or to use profanity when addressing you.
Let’s see, in that post I responded to you mischaracterized my positions, called me homophobic (which you never defined, even after being asked to), a bigot, unAmerican, and said I make you sick.
Like I said, sweets, I respond in kind. If you’re civil, I’m civil. It’s really that simple. Or maybe you think I shouldn’t take your insults personally because you deliver them flatly.
So, feel free to continue your search. Or, as I had asked, retract your blatantly incorrect statement.
Again, I offer cites that don’t fit in with your self-image and you deny their relevance. You claim you want to dial down the hostility, but you are the one ramping it up, sweets, with your swearing, name-calling, and other childish bullshit. So I’ve proven my point, and you stamp your little foot and can’t admit you’re wrong. Par for the course, babycakes. I expect nothing better from you.
Like I said, “in kind”. There are plenty of posters with whom I’ve been 100% civil. You can review this thread and see for yourself. Go ahead, check. I’ll wait.
…
Well, imagine that, you’ve found precisely what I said you’ve find. So, now you should be asking, “Why has he been able to remain completely civil with some posters, while slapping the shit out of the idiot toy called levdrakon? And why has he had a few specific instances of incivility displayed toward me among our more numerous exchanges?”.
I’m sorry, but no, it was not a response in kind. I never swore at you, told you to go fuck yourself, shove anything up your ass, called you a shithead or an idiot. That’s not a response, that’s spewing insults. I told you things you didn’t want to hear, and that made you angry. You decided to take it to a childish, nasty place, lowering the tone noticeably. That’s not responding in kind. That’s being a complete rude jerk having a tantrum. But I know you’ll continue to rationalize away your own bad behavior. That ability seems to be your greatest personal strength.
A) if you think you’ve slapped the shit out of me I feel really sorry for you buggy bear, because you couldn’t slap the shit out of a dirty diaper.
B) I really piss you off because I don’t coddle you. You like to troll. “Oh, I vote against gays but I’m totally all for gays.” Then you get people to type out 500-word essays trying to explain to you why, for the 10,000th time, you are an idiot. Dare someone actually call you an idiot - the job for which I’m more than willing to volunteer - you get pissy.
Ooh, ooh, treat me with respect. This is a debate! Tell me over and over again why I shouldn’t take people’s civil rights away. I wank off to it.
Hey magellan01, I see that for all you claim that civil unions for gays would solve all our problems, you haven’t contributed to this thread. Why ever not?
No doubt you’ll say that the discussion over there “bores” you. No doubt you also know full well that if you were to take your limited vocabulary (including those old reliables, “fuck you”, “shithead”, and “idiot”) over there, you’d be eaten alive. Far easier for you to hang out in the Pit where you can always fire off a hearty “fuck you!” in lieu of an actual response.
I pointed to your incivility. Ignore it if it suits you. You also, more then once, chose to mischaracterize my position. That tends to rile honest posters. I can see how you’ll have to take my word on that point. True, I didn’t respond in kind to that. I find it more to my liking to slap back than lie back in response. But you stick to what you think works for you.
Hehehe. Let’s see, I’ll tell you why you piss me off and you tell me if it matches your list. Okay? Good. Here we go:
you are one of the most dishonest posters I’ve ever encountered
you are one of the least intelligent posters I’ve ever encountered
you live a delusion of actually thinking you’re smart (see #2)
you cannot track an argument or adhere to logic, which, I guess, you can blame on #2
you post under the influence, either of drugs, alcohol, or psychosis. Possibly all three.
you have zero control over your temper (which, I admit, makes you a fun plaything, my little marionette)
So, how many did you get right?
Overall, I think I might be done with you. The challenge and fun have waned. And I’ve wasted too much time, kinda like I used to do with video games years ago. But if you make it worth my time I’ll be happy to toy with you some more. But you’ll really have to try to make it good. In the meantime, friend, deal.