It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It is comparable in the sense that you support some forms of marriage, but you deny other forms of marriage based on your own perception of what is right and wrong,
I would like to hear from YOU why they should be illegal and why not grant them the same rights as everyone else ?.
Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
It is comparable in the sense that you support some forms of marriage, but you deny other forms of marriage based on your own perception of what is right and wrong,
We're not discussing opinions, we're discussing facts and evidence. Facts and evidence actually support my position. I realize you have trouble understanding this since you have made several claims that you refuse to back up with evidence. Stop ignoring the parts of my post that point out your nonsensical opinion, stop accusing gays of this and that and then ignoring when I call you on it. I don't intend on keeping up this discussion if you keep doing that or keep ignoring when I address it.
Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by jsobecky
I never said there was a link between the two. I said that they existed because of re-definition of marriage.
Then your point is irrelevant, because we’re discussing gay marriage here. But I’m still willing to see you post evidence that a society’s issues or slippery slopes have been directly linked to redefining marriage. What about the societies that did better because of redefining marriage? Can it only go one way in your head?
You keep bringing 'sub-groups' into the discussion. Gay is also a sub-group. What makes it so special that we should include it and not all sub-groups?
I didn’t bring subgroups into this, another poster did. I’ve already explained this, the subgroups are not related, and therefore there is no need for anyone to support the others while supporting one. There is absolutely no link between them other than that they are subgroups.
That's why being gay is legal and accepted and many of the other subgroups are not legal, or accepted.
For the same reasons that being gay is legal and incest, bestiality, child molestation is not. Please read up on incest, bestiality, and child molestation laws. There are reasons for why they are illegal and they do not relate to why homosexuality is legal.
I have given just as many facts and evidence as you have.
I have not accused gays of anything.
The gay movement just have more political clout and are better organized.
Please supply specific examples of societies that did better because of redefinition of marriage to include gays.
And by the same token, that is not a reason to exclude them from marriage.
Why cannot other laws change?
Originally posted by justsomeboreddude
It is comparable in the sense that you support some forms of marriage, but you deny other forms of marriage based on your own perception of what is right and wrong, which is EXACTLY what Pat Robertson is doing. He just goes one step further than you and includes gay marriage as being wrong too.
This man is not trying to single out gays
Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
I will answer you, but right now I need to take a break. It is that all-important time here on the East Coast --- suppertime!
"God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve," said Falwell, appearing yesterday on the Christian Broadcasting Network's "700 Club," hosted by Robertson.
"Jerry, that's my feeling," Robertson responded. "I think we've just seen the antechamber to terror. We haven't even begun to see what they can do to the major population."
Falwell said the American Civil Liberties Union has "got to take a lot of blame for this," again winning Robertson's agreement: "Well, yes."
Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by justsomeboreddude
I have given just as many facts and evidence as you have.
You haven’t given any. You’re the one trying to support a claim, remember? It’s your job to produce evidence and make it one of merit.
I have not accused gays of anything.
This is what you stated to me:
The gay movement just have more political clout and are better organized.
I think you edited it out of your post though, among other statements, how sneaky of you. We’re done. Have a nice life.
We must not forget where fear mongering has taken us before
Finally, as we document in our book, the long history in Scandinavia with registered partnerships has seen some benefits accrue to the institution. Not only have long-standing trends in lower marriage rates / greater divorce rates / greater numbers of out-of wedlock births reversed themselves or stabilized, but same-sex unions have also proven themselves to keep relationships stronger, strengthen families, protect children, promote tolerance, and possibly lead to benefits on a national scale such as lower national rates of STD and HIV infections.