Yet, I just offered it a few posts back. Imagine that, a frothing, hateful moron like you being wrong. Again. Whodathunk?
If you’ll look back, genius, you’ll see it was answered. In fact, to prevent you from lying again, here’s your “question”:
And my answer (which was more than your idiocy deserved):
Please try to refrain from such plain falsehoods in the future. Thank you.
You know, it would be a lot easier to deal with you if you did harbor us some ill will. Dealing with someone who wants to hurt us because they hate us is something that we’re used to. Dealing with someone who wants to hurt us because they’re indifferent to us is confusing and disorienting.
That out of the way, and with absolutely no personal malice intended, fuck your compromise. Fuck it right in the ass with a giant black dildo. Fuck it until it bleeds to death.
I don’t agree with your first statement, but pretend that I do for the sake of argument.
Let’s look at some of the situations that cause a shift away from your ideal:
-Divorce (a choice)
-Death of a parent (aside from suicide, not a choice)
Now, how would you suggest that society encourage families impacted by divorce and death to somehow regain the ideal?
I argue that, contrary to your statement, that encouragement need not require preference, especially when such a preference is expressed in such a way as to take away the rights of others.
To argue otherwise would be to either impose some sort of restriction of rights onto divorcees and widows/widowers, or be a hypocrite.
It technically isn’t a compromise. Certainly it is one between current society and the cause of gay marriage, but as I understand magellan’s position the situation he’s set out of all legal rights but without the name marriage is actually his preferred option. He himself would not seem to actually be compromising on anything, though I could be misunderstanding. So it’s not his compromise.
Right. Insults as answer. Are you ever going to address the question, or just come back with more insults? You feel gay marriage is going to deprive you of a concept you hold dear. You’re just as afraid as flat-earthers who don’t want to hear the earth is round. Newsflash: people adjusted, although a few people like you probably burned a few heretics, first.
I’m not following you. I WANT gays to have all the same rights. I WANT marriage to refer exclusively to the relationship between a man and a woman. If I have to choose between the two, I choose the latter, for the reasons I gave earlier.
I think the best course is to compromise. Society at large wants no SSM and many want no rights extended to gays. Gays want all the legal rights afforded everyone else, included married couples, and the opportunity to marry the person they love. I think a good compromise to extend to gays all the rights, but leave “marriage” alone. Have some sort of formalized union or partnership that would come with ALL the same legal benefits of marriage.
Does that answer it?
I addressed the question. I even reposted it for you. If you want to ask another one, go ahead. I promise to give it the answer it deserves. If you want a better answer, ask a better question. You might be able to see that others have been able to do so. If what you’ve offered represents your best effort, going to sleep might be the better use of your time at this point.
If you’re going to keep repeating the last sentence, you need to stop saying the first sentence. These are not positions you can hold simultaneously.
Death first.
Is that your way of coming on to me, Miller? No drinks first, even?
Well, at least there was no malice in it…
Wow, still no answer, and more insults.
Not sure I’m following you. But “encouraging” an ideal needn’t mean taking draconian measure to ensure 100% compliance. Excluded middle and all that.
Oh, maybe that’s what Antinor01 was trying to get at. You’re right, kinda. I arrived at what I thought was a good compromise position for society. It’s hard to further compromise from that position as I immediately ceded to the homosexual side ALL concessions, save one. Is there something I’m overlooking by way of compromise?
All right, forgive me for not reading all 368+ posts here, who’s defense of voting yes on prop 8 from what I did read seems to basically consist of “I want gays to have every right as straights (except getting married)”, but can you please answer me this: You are allowed to get married if any of the following apply to you
are taller than 6’0"
have brown hair
speak with a lisp
have a preference for smoked gouda
surreptitiously watch child porn
speak more than 2 languages
have 5+ cats who go by different names depending on the season
are 18 and have only dated 1 person ever
etc. etc. etc.
You are not allowed to get married if you:
are gay
End of list. I don’t get it. How is it that you can allow marraige in any sort of bizarre configuration of human persona except for this ONE thing, and ONE thing only, which makes it not an option?
Wow. Another lie.
Oh, please. Don’t turn into an idiot on me. You know damn well what I meant. Do you really need me to type “…except SSM” every single time. Which I think I’ve actually done except that one time because I thought it was so clear.
Well, at least I know I was right about your lying being a delusional coping mechanism.
Because marriage is the societal recognition of the the natural coming together of one man and one woman. A union that usually results in the production of children. Cats and Gouda cheese play no role in that.
OK so what’s so special about the 1 man 1 woman equation? Keep in mind that as of 2003, 43.7% of custodial mothers and 56.2% of custodial fathers were either separated or divorced (cite)?
I wasn’t being sarcastic when I said no malice intended. Despite the fact that on Tuesday, you helped vote away my rights for quite literally the single stupidest reason imaginable, I take you entirely at your word that you did it without any ill intent towards gays. I just wanted to make it absolutely, emphatically clear that we are never, under any circumstances, ever going to stop pushing for full marriage rights. You can look forward to having this exact same fight, every two years, until you either give up or drop dead.
Yes, actually. I want to make sure that you’re well aware that you are, in fact, advocating for second class citizen status for every homosexual in America. It’s something I want to make sure you keep at the forefront of your mind every time you think about this issue. Because I know you have a conscience, and I know you have the intellect to recognize how hollow your arguments really are. It’s only a matter of time before those two positive attributes, which I know you have in abundance, will overcome your knee-jerk, reactionary opposition to something that you know, deep down, is both inevitably coming, and inarguably deserved. Making sure you acknowledge that “except” every single time you open your mouth on this subject will only hasten that process.