You can hardly call SSM a right, if it doesn’t exist in 95% of the country.
You know who’s smarter than you by at least 30 IQ points?
Me.
And probably Clinton.
I know you are, but what am I? :rolleyes:
ITT: fail at basic math. pretty sad.
Grow up. I stand by 95%, by population. If you can demonstrate otherwise, let’s see it.
That just means 90% (not 95%) of the country is currently violating basic human rights held to be inalienable by our forefathers.
If a state outlawed all gun ownership, would you shrug and say “It’s not a right in that state”?
Cite, please, that our forefathers thought that gay marriage was a basic human right?
Top o’ the page, dippy. Unless you’d like to try to argue that gay people aren’t really full citizens and don’t deserve full rights.
Frankly, I don’t think you have a dog in this fight. You just see something the liberals are all het up about and you take the opposite stance.
I mispoke, obviously.
40 points.
[sub]Clinton, too[/sub]
Not that one exactly.
But right to happiness.
Our forefathers also thought that black people should be owned, and only white landowning males should be allowed to vote.
As times change, the society must adapt, or wither and die.
Would you rather see the USA wither and die than see the rights of gays to be happy upheld?
Trying to use your own post as a “cite” makes you a tool, at best.
That’s a pretty stupid way to do percent of gay marriage area. Wouldn’t land area make more sense then population?
But considering you can’t back up your opinion without Argumentum ad populum fallacy guess I can’t expect much.
You know who else asked rhetorical questions?
Clinton.
Mind, child, that I don’t have to back up anything to you. That said, how do you figure that gay marriage is a right in the United States, when it clearly is not?
Not in California, Texas, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, New York, etc.
You know who was fond of ignoring inconvenient facts?
Bush.
Gosh, I wish I could take credit for the Declaration of Independence.
If you are not going to respond to the SEVERAL efforts to make you understand that the US CONSTITUTION guarantee’s the right to persue happiness, and that the courts have already stated that the right to marry is necessary to that right on occasion, then there is no furrther point in talking to you about it.
Are you ignoring it because you have no response, or because you can’t beat it?
She’s ignoring it because Carol’s not here to argue, just piss off liberals.
Is there right to Gay Marraige in Arkansas, for example?
Since it’s a basic right, yes. Just as if Arkansas ruled that black people weren’t allowed marriage, blacks would still have the right to marriage. The fact that they don’t recognize it doesn’t change that; any right, by nature, can be violated.