Active Users:767 Time:05/08/2025 10:07:52 PM
Re: That's utter nonsense. Cannoli Send a noteboard - 19/01/2010 10:59:45 PM
1) It has no history because homosexuality has historically been forbidden and/or persecuted by governments (usually "high-minded" religious politicians). Thus, your argument on that point falls apart because the world (or in this case the nation) is in a unique position to finally extend the right of recognized union to homosexuals for the first time.
They have the EXACT same rights of recognized union. The practice of marriage has little to do with sexual preference and feelings, and everything to do with involuntary reproduction. One could argue that in the modern world, its perquisties are obsolete, and require LESS legal enforcement, not more widespread.

2) It would not be pointless if you are of the persuasion that certain tax benefits are gained through marriage for the sake of having children. I do not know whether you support this theory or not, but for those who do argue this direction then gay marriage would provide the same benefits given that the gay couple adopt. My own response to such people who argue against gay marriage by using this '"incentive to procreate" argument is that if the theory were true then such benefits should be taken from heterosexual couples who don't have children in a reasonable amount of time (naturally or by many of the same methods gays could use). If you do not subscribe to the "incentive" theory then ignore this.
I do not so subscribe. In any event I am not sure what you are talking about. As far as I understand it, if you have dependant children, you get the tax break, regardless of your sexuality or marital status. As it should be. As far as I am concerned, special legal exemptions for married people in an otherwise oppressive or restrictive law or government policy are merely sops to get people to aquiesce to an unjust infringement of their liberties or usurpation of property. Removing such breaks and loopholes keeps the pressure up and will cause greater dissatisfaction with wrongful policies. Therefore, I am naturally opposed to this sort of measure. What they do is make different groups jon in the scramble for their goverment masters' table scraps, as in the case of same-sex marriage - homosexuals rightfully seeking to hand over less of their money to the government, rather than opposing the tax in the first place, instead are diverted by the brass ring of marriage exemptions. Rather than try to right the course of the ship away from the reefs, instead they are demanding a seat on the life boat.

3) "...attempts to force every one to conform to their view". You know this describes every law, right?
And? What is your point? That is EXACTLY what law is. Any more insights like "people die in war"? If you are attempting to accuse me of some sort of hypocrisy, you would have to cite a law of which I have expressed approval. Good luck. As far as this point applies to the issue at hand, because of this essential nature of laws, they should only be enacted to support practices or customs in place, and to recognize them as such or correct grave injustices. When both parties have the same rights (any man may marry any woman, and vice versa, regardless of their respective sexual orientation, and neither homo- nor heterosexuals may marry someone of the same sex ), and there is no history or tradition of carrying out a particular practice, it should not be enshrined in law, particularly if it will only benefit a few to the detriment of many.
Cannoli
"Sometimes unhinged, sometimes unfair, always entertaining"
- The Crownless

“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.” GK Chesteron
Deus Vult!
This message last edited by Cannoli on 20/01/2010 at 12:25:07 AM
Reply to message
I may have lost a friend over same sex marriage - 17/01/2010 08:03:26 AM 1509 Views
the problem with your friend is the "southern evangelical christian" part - 17/01/2010 09:07:02 AM 817 Views
They believe gay marriage is ongoing unrepentant sin. - 17/01/2010 12:04:58 PM 816 Views
God your a moron. - 17/01/2010 09:10:17 PM 769 Views
be nice - 18/01/2010 06:26:58 AM 675 Views
<shrug> They can believe that all that they like - 18/01/2010 08:07:28 PM 724 Views
And live accordingly. Just like everyone else. - 18/01/2010 11:10:51 PM 731 Views
Re: And live accordingly. Just like everyone else. - 20/01/2010 10:40:36 PM 684 Views
It is, I believe, hardest for the intelligent educated man. - 21/01/2010 10:29:39 AM 831 Views
You can't use logic in an irrational argument. - 17/01/2010 10:12:11 AM 714 Views
LOL... *NM* - 18/01/2010 05:21:14 AM 391 Views
You and Adam are being equally unconstructive. - 18/01/2010 06:21:45 AM 630 Views
why do you imply "constructive" is in anyway the intent? *NM* - 18/01/2010 06:32:27 AM 308 Views
*shrug* I never stopped believing in lost causes? - 18/01/2010 07:36:04 AM 635 Views
Re: You can't use logic in an irrational argument. - 18/01/2010 06:28:41 AM 770 Views
Always welcome. - 18/01/2010 07:31:27 AM 879 Views
We finally converted you - 17/01/2010 08:43:25 PM 653 Views
Not much of a friend then. Good ridance to bad friends. *NM* - 17/01/2010 08:51:02 PM 449 Views
I agree. A friend who can't respect differences of opinion is no friend at all. *NM* - 17/01/2010 09:11:33 PM 312 Views
seriously. *NM* - 17/01/2010 10:46:17 PM 268 Views
Only because such sentiment is my pet peeve...condemning exclusivity is hypocritical. *NM* - 19/01/2010 12:37:37 AM 338 Views
yeah no kidding - 18/01/2010 06:30:45 AM 640 Views
It forces other people to accept THEIR ideology that same sex unions are legitimate. - 18/01/2010 01:49:20 AM 817 Views
I would assume, then, that you don't support any government-mandated health care? - 18/01/2010 02:07:40 AM 634 Views
Correct - 18/01/2010 04:29:04 AM 716 Views
Although I disagree with the vast majority of your arguments, - 18/01/2010 08:50:09 AM 708 Views
Thank you. - 20/01/2010 01:47:34 AM 864 Views
Please tell me you have a source for that quotation. Other than me. - 21/01/2010 12:31:27 PM 731 Views
It's GK Chesterton! What the hell are you going on about? - 27/01/2010 02:41:00 AM 606 Views
Link? - 27/01/2010 09:28:22 AM 701 Views
I can't find a link to the exact quote - 27/01/2010 12:14:19 PM 813 Views
Re: Link? - 27/01/2010 01:38:36 PM 833 Views
Perhaps we should define our terms more precisely. - 15/02/2010 11:28:09 AM 1203 Views
we do not exist in a free market. - 18/01/2010 04:09:37 AM 645 Views
And that's bad. Since when has the correct response to oppression been "accept further oppression"? *NM* - 18/01/2010 04:30:44 AM 316 Views
I am simply pointing out your arguments do not apply to the present economic environment. - 18/01/2010 04:46:04 AM 593 Views
No I am not. - 19/01/2010 10:44:31 PM 724 Views
That's utter nonsense. - 18/01/2010 04:19:57 AM 674 Views
Re: That's utter nonsense. - 18/01/2010 04:41:27 AM 691 Views
civil marriages DO have a purpose. - 18/01/2010 04:49:12 AM 671 Views
Re: civil marriages DO have a purpose. - 19/01/2010 10:47:18 PM 732 Views
Re: That's utter nonsense. - 18/01/2010 07:13:54 AM 676 Views
Re: That's utter nonsense. - 19/01/2010 10:59:45 PM 642 Views
Re: That's utter nonsense. - 18/01/2010 07:15:50 AM 782 Views
Re: That's utter nonsense. - 20/01/2010 01:38:37 AM 563 Views
Are you at all surprised? - 18/01/2010 07:59:30 AM 664 Views
A truly free country means I don't have the freedom to shoot you - 18/01/2010 05:57:44 AM 762 Views
You really said nothing, right there. - 18/01/2010 08:34:33 AM 711 Views
I presume you are equally against the current set up - 18/01/2010 12:31:33 PM 747 Views
He said as much in his response to me above. *NM* - 18/01/2010 09:37:49 PM 255 Views
That's such an amusing argument - 18/01/2010 08:17:15 PM 625 Views
I'm against people with pasta based nicknames on fantasy forums *NM* - 19/01/2010 03:03:31 PM 276 Views
cannoli is a pastry *NM* - 19/01/2010 07:25:04 PM 252 Views
I have no problem with people with pastry based names, just pasta - 21/01/2010 12:28:44 AM 603 Views
I can't help but find it funny - 18/01/2010 12:51:57 PM 615 Views
So... - 18/01/2010 03:39:33 PM 753 Views
I think you missed who was the one to walk out - 18/01/2010 04:11:05 PM 637 Views
you acept your friends with their warts or you don't - 18/01/2010 06:45:13 PM 741 Views
I think you missed who was the one to walk out *NM* - 18/01/2010 08:01:25 PM 234 Views
I don't think it was that clear - 18/01/2010 10:01:32 PM 669 Views
I don't think it is all that clear yet, either - 18/01/2010 10:27:54 PM 696 Views
I wasn't taking sides - 18/01/2010 10:57:39 PM 574 Views

Reply to Message