Pros and cons of SSM as it pertains society

Many of those being holy.

Justice delayed is justice denied. And, if the reasons for the laws being disruptive cannot withstand scrutiny, is the disruptiveness itself a reason for denying justice?

So, we have “I can’t think of anything”, “I can’t think of anything” again, and “Oh, all right, because the meaning of ‘the front of the bus’ was diluted by letting the coloreds there too.”

:shrug: QED.

In fairness if we go by the quote boytyperanma provided above, magellan01 apparently worries about a gradual erosion of some societal cohesion over multiple generations. So by his thinking the damage he fears will not become obvious until long after all of us here are dead.

Of course denying what I would consider equality on the off chance that it might speculatively follow an uncorrected path to some uncertain societal ill generations from now, seems like a remarkably piss-poor argument from where I’m sitting. But shitty or not it does seem kind of unarguable the way he has framed it. Which again probably makes this thread another colossal waste of time if all most posters want to do is debate magellan01’s particular POV.

I think it could be if it were made a federal law. That’s a reason not to have federal involvement in this for the time being. But since everyone takes the politically easy path of states rights on this one, I’m not seeing the disruption either. It may be a controversial change in some states, but any state that would make the switch wouldn’t end up with any serious disruption. I don’t really know who is against SSM except [del]old fogeys[/del] traditionalists and those who exploit them.

[quote=“Voyager, post:12, topic:629675”]

Here you go:
[li]Some entries in dictionaries will have to be changed. The definition of marriage seems very important to some people.[/li][/QUOTE]

Fun fact: the Canadian Oxford Dictionary was amended shortly after the rulings in 2003. The language remains usable.

Well, yeah, in Canada. You people are probably just too cold to worry about it.

So, you’re saying his mom is some kind of ricist?

Could be worse…she could be a milletant ricist.

It’s disruptive when people go from one state to another and are told they aren’t married. Disruptive both to them personally, and to everyone else when they have to go to court to get things that should be theirs automatically.

You should repent of a pun that bad in sackcloth and ashes … say, during Lentiltide?

A Calrose by any other name.

Accusations of pun-ditry make me cereally sorghum! Rye, oh, rye must wheat be so corny?!

makes note to self: Pun surge stops threads dead in their tracks