I don’t think you should change or stop voicing your opinion. I think your opinion makes you a moron.
So, you were simply unable to do it without calling me names in GD? But you are trying to censor me, admit it. You and others in this thread think I’m obligated to either find the opposing arguments convincing or to simply keep quiet. Why in the world would you think that? What are you afraid of? And has it dawned on you, that each and every time I post on the subject there are people—mostly the same people again and again—who are also posting on the subject. Do you really think that they have more of a right to express their position than someone who you disagree with? I would suggest that instead of a Great Debate you start a forum and entitle it The Great Circle Jerk. Seems like it would be a better fit for you.
I predict people will still be trying to explain this on page seven.
Solved this little issue a couple of years ago.
“This message is hidden because magellan01 is on your ignore list.”
Well, there goes my night of sleep. 
What you say is fine. I think you could go further and say that “I don’t think you should stop voicing your opinion or are obligated to change it, but I think you should.”
As far as the last part, do you think that anyone that hold my position is less intelligent than you? That if you could see the IQ of everyone who believes as I do, that your IQ would be higher than any of them? That there’d be no one, say a surgeon, mathematician, artist, author, lawyer whose work you would admire for its brilliance?
He’s wasn’t gay; it was just a bit of undercooked potato.
I don’t know for sure, but if I had to answer based on data gathered from this response: Yes.
Too true. Although you did tell magellan to call you a faggot and referenced it as truth. If you interpret it at face value other than what you meant…well…then Marley truly is dead.
On the contrary.
His opinion is a symptom of his moronitude.
This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad move.
I must confess that I’m not fully up on this, but is there more to your position Magellan01 than an insistence that we preserve the definition of marriage for, you know, Webster’s sake?
If I may, I gather he is concerned about possible negative societal effects of devaluing traditional marriage as it has existed for thousands of years, though such effects may not become apparent for (in his estimation) 40 years, nor can he describe what these effects will be except in the vaguest terms, nor can he describe how gay marriage will bring them about exactly, nor can he describe the early signs of these effects that we might witness in countries that have had gay marriage for several years already.
I gather his scenario is the U.S. passes gay marriage in 2013, then everything goes on normally until 2053, then -bam!- herpes.
Isn’t that really more the definition of a chauvinist than a bigot?
Not that it makes him into a better person.
A chauvinist is thus:
- Militant devotion to and glorification of one’s country; fanatical patriotism.
- Prejudiced belief in the superiority of one’s own gender, group, or kind
I don’t think he qualifies there.
For the record, I haven’t been around enough for some of these debates, but would gladly debate magellan01 on the subject. I’m sure some, or most, of my arguments would be repeats of previous argument; and it’s clearly been stated that his will be a repeat.
Buuut… whatever.
For what it’s worth, magellan01, I don’t think you’re a bigot. Your opinion is yours on a controversial matter that is based on a social science. Therefore there is no objectively right or wrong answer–hence opinions. I just happen to disagree with your stance.
And look what we have here, folks. A person who disagrees with me, possibly vehemently, who doesn’t go off the deep end and post like an unthinking, unprincipled buffoon. See, it is possible. Thank you for your post, Archaic_Entity. Your position is utterly reasonable. I appreciate you sharing it here. Perhaps it will give the brothers pause. Though I am not optimistic.
Almost.
If he just left it at, “I don’t think gay people should be allowed to marry each other,” then you’d be right.
But he makes claims with truth value (e.g., “If you set up the laws the way I suggest, there is one set of laws for everyone.”) These claims are not only false, they are so obviously false that it’s difficult to believe anyone thinks they’d be true.
That’s what he’s getting mocked for here.
No, I was able to do it, ability and volition don’t need to share the same common goal.
Sure. I’ll freely admit. I’ll sing it from the rooftops or title a thread asking you to STFU. See, look up to the title of the thread. It’s asking you to censor yourself by telling you to shut up. There’s not a speck of gray area there.
Like I said earlier. Use this thread as a placeholder for your “opinion” that you’ve constantly repeated for 8+ years without dredging your feability out over and over again for all to see in valid threads.
And has it dawned on you that, like a tampon that doesn’t absorb, your opinion is worthless? It doesn’t add anything to an intelligent conversation. It doesn’t enlighten anyone with a unique point of view. It just serves to remind the rest of us that there are idiots out there with access to a computer.
Look, we get it that you’re proud to be an ignorant piece of shit. You’re gallant in your unwavering ability to regurgitate a single talking point over and over without remorse for those it effects and claim to be logical. You’ve taken this point of the view “to the quarry” if you will. As the old adage goes “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt”. You’ve given us years and years to prove you’re a fool. The doubt is firmly removed. Your quest is over. Now kindly shut up.
Actually, that’s the Merriam-Webster definition of bigot I sourced. It’s quite apropos for Magellan01’s posting style.
This is rich. So, you’d be happier with an opinion that deprives SS couples of marriage and offers no way for them to enjoy the legal benefits and privileges that the institution affords OS couples? Do you actually believe your own bullshit? Wow.
What bugs you and others is that I want gay couples to have all those things. I think it is both sad that they don’t have them, but I won’t join your team. So, you can’t have me on your side and you can’t discount me as some back country rube. Sorry, bubb. That’s your problem, not mine.
But ya are, Blanche, ya are a bigot. Look back at the OP,where I linked this gem where you were talking about gay parents.
[QUOTE=magellan01]
Wow. I’m sure those children who get the less-than-normal childhood are so lucky to make the sacrifice for your social agenda
[/QUOTE]
Your faux enlightened slip is showing.
Not that there is anything wrong with that.