Seriously, is there any logical argument against gay marriage?

Originally posted by quietlearner

Originally posted by GringoViejo

Of course you can, but that doesn't make it a ferrari or a Rolls Royce. But I like your style.

However, by definition if gay people wanted to call their union a marriage, they can. It doesn't matter what any "god" says about it. "god's" word is irrelevant.

like you said, calling something something else does not make it the same

Obviously you got excited and didn't read the second part.



No matter, your failure to comprehend it does not change anything.

Originally posted by GringoViejo

Originally posted by Helious
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

Sorry bud, unlike the garbage you are spewing there is zero opinion in my statements, there is only fact and truth in exposing what is obviously an agenda and not a crusade.

I am all for gays having the same rights as all others through private unions, what I am against is the war for the word marriage.

edit on 22-5-2011 by Helious because: (no reason given)

Sorry bud, unlike your delusion of grandeur dictates, you not liking the use of the word marriage by gay people does not change that they are married. If they want to call it a civil union or a marriage, they can. Both terms are accurate.

There can't be a war for a word, no one owns it. That is like waging a war on an idea.

Of course, you can choose to not recognize it as a "marriage," but the fact that it is a marriage is not predicated on your acceptance. Thank god, pun intended.

edit on 22-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

No, in point of fact you are wrong. Both terms are not accurate. Regardless of state allowing it to be called that, it is not marriage as it is devoid of the authority that grants that religious based word. Your government saying it does, in fact not make it true.

It is not by my own opinion that idea is rejected, it is in fact the whole of opinion of every religious text that endorses the word. Government can not hijack the word and install it as truth as they lack the authority to do so, but if you would like to bumble through life thinking they can you should probably pick up a copy of "1984" by George Orwell.

Originally posted by Helious

Originally posted by GringoViejo

Originally posted by Helious
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

Sorry bud, unlike the garbage you are spewing there is zero opinion in my statements, there is only fact and truth in exposing what is obviously an agenda and not a crusade.

I am all for gays having the same rights as all others through private unions, what I am against is the war for the word marriage.

edit on 22-5-2011 by Helious because: (no reason given)

Sorry bud, unlike your delusion of grandeur dictates, you not liking the use of the word marriage by gay people does not change that they are married. If they want to call it a civil union or a marriage, they can. Both terms are accurate.

There can't be a war for a word, no one owns it. That is like waging a war on an idea.

Of course, you can choose to not recognize it as a "marriage," but the fact that it is a marriage is not predicated on your acceptance. Thank god, pun intended.

edit on 22-5-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)

No, in point of fact you are wrong. Both terms are not accurate. Regardless of state allowing it to be called that, it is not marriage as it is devoid of the authority that grants that religious based word. Your government saying it does, in fact not make it true.

It is not by my own opinion that idea is rejected, it is in fact the whole of opinion of every religious text that endorses the word. Government can not hijack the word and install it as truth as they lack the authority to do so, but if you would like to bumble through life thinking they can you should probably pick up a copy of "1984" by George Orwell.

edit on 22-5-2011 by Helious because: (no reason given)

I am very familiar with Mr. Blair's book.

You act as if your religion as any sort of authority, how perplexing

Like I said to a previous poster, your lack of comprehension does not change anything. If two gay guys want to get married, they can, and it is a marriage no matter what you or any "god" says. I'm sorry it offends you, but it really doesn't matter if you, or "god" for that matter, is offended. You and "god" can both deal with it.

Originally posted by GringoViejo

Obviously you got excited and didn't read the second part.

No matter, your failure to comprehend it does not change anything.

obviously you didnt read any of my past posts
and obviously you are not here for logical respectful discussions
and obviously you have already set your mind to think just one way
so obviously I should stop arguing with you

Originally posted by Helious
You don't care where I "think" it came from because you refuse to believe the truth.

Truth? As in God?

That is your choice - - if you want to believe that.

However - - - what you choose to believe - - - will not deny Equal Rights to others.

There will be NO "Separate but Equal". There will only be Equal.

Originally posted by quietlearner

Originally posted by GringoViejo

Obviously you got excited and didn't read the second part.

No matter, your failure to comprehend it does not change anything.

obviously you didnt read any of my past posts
and obviously you are not here for logical respectful discussions
and obviously you have already set your mind to think just one way
so obviously I should stop arguing with you

Originally posted by Helious
You are letting your emotions control your brain and your common sense is suffering badly as a result. Your argument is not an argument over anything tangible, it is an argument formed to push an agenda to achieve a a perceived state of equality you feel self entitled too, because you feel different.

I'm letting my emotions control my brain?

I have an agenda?

Good one

Originally posted by quietlearner

I just presented a logical argument of why gay union is not the same as marriage,

Really? Because I saw nothing that resembled a logical argument.

You want to try again?

Nice touch throwing the "Liberal" in there. That usually happens when posters run out of anything real to say.

reply to post by GringoViejo


You speak to reading comprehension yet you in fact seem to have none. My religion? What exactly is my religion? Have I mentioned that at all in any of my posts? Do I have one? Or is it that fact are facts regardless of what I believe?

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Helious
You don't care where I "think" it came from because you refuse to believe the truth.

Truth? As in God?

That is your choice - - if you want to believe that.

However - - - what you choose to believe - - - will not deny Equal Rights to others.

There will be NO "Separate but Equal". There will only be Equal.

There is no argument about religion here. It is a matter of you trying to brand a word and a tradition with something it simply is not.

What I choose to believe has no bearing on your imaginary belief that in some point in history all people will be equal. This is just not true, human nature does not allow for it.

Again, more new age nonsense that along with a buck will get you a subway token, total nonsense and idealistic imaginary on the most grandest scale.

Originally posted by Annee

Really? Because I saw nothing that resembled a logical argument.

You want to try again?

Nice touch throwing the "Liberal" in there. That usually happens when posters run out of anything real to say.

I'm pretty sure you saw it, you just didn't/wont recognize it
I think the burden is on you to prove what I said is illogical
you can't just say something is illogical, you have to explain why or it's just personal opinion

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Helious
You are letting your emotions control your brain and your common sense is suffering badly as a result. Your argument is not an argument over anything tangible, it is an argument formed to push an agenda to achieve a a perceived state of equality you feel self entitled too, because you feel different.

I'm letting my emotions control my brain?

I have an agenda?

Good one

Yes, you are, because you are not using basic common sense to form any of your statements, much less fact.

Yes, you do have an agenda because if you simply wanted equal rights under law which you so frequently quote you wouldn't have an obsession on what that law was called.

Any person who views your posts can see that, it takes no special skill as you are not that apt at hiding it.

Originally posted by Helious
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

You speak to reading comprehension yet you in fact seem to have none. My religion? What exactly is my religion? Have I mentioned that at all in any of my posts? Do I have one? Or is it that fact are facts regardless of what I believe?

Well forgive me for assuming such ignorance was based in some sort of religion.

You keep alluding to the word marriage being reserved for religious traditions, whatever they may be. I am sorry to inform you that this particular view has no effect on reality.

I really enjoy that gays getting married and using the word marriage (which is accurate) infuriates you

Originally posted by quietlearner

Originally posted by Annee

Really? Because I saw nothing that resembled a logical argument.

You want to try again?

Nice touch throwing the "Liberal" in there. That usually happens when posters run out of anything real to say.

I'm pretty sure you saw it, you just didn't/wont recognize it
I think the burden is on you to prove what I said is illogical
you can't just say something is illogical, you have to explain why or it's just personal opinion

No it is not on me.

It is on you to make your position clear.

Originally posted by GringoViejo

Originally posted by Helious
reply to post by GringoViejo

 

You speak to reading comprehension yet you in fact seem to have none. My religion? What exactly is my religion? Have I mentioned that at all in any of my posts? Do I have one? Or is it that fact are facts regardless of what I believe?

Well forgive me for assuming such ignorance was based in some sort of religion.

You keep alluding to the word marriage being reserved for religious traditions, whatever they may be. I am sorry to inform you that this particular view has no effect on reality.

I really enjoy that gays getting married and using the word marriage (which is accurate) infuriates you

So, in reality please show me since you assert such that the word marriage is derived from a source that is neutral to religion. Please provide me one example where the state has evoked the ceremony before religion had adopted and controlled it.

Please educate me on your expansive knowledge of the situation because as you would wage, I am ignorant of the situation and the meaning of the word. Educate me, I beg you!

Originally posted by Helious

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Helious
You don't care where I "think" it came from because you refuse to believe the truth.

Truth? As in God?

That is your choice - - if you want to believe that.

However - - - what you choose to believe - - - will not deny Equal Rights to others.

There will be NO "Separate but Equal". There will only be Equal.

There is no argument about religion here. It is a matter of you trying to brand a word and a tradition with something it simply is not.

FACT: There are LEGAL gay Marriages all over the world.

New tradition I guess.

Those who are Married own the word.

Originally posted by Helious
Yes, you are, because you are not using basic common sense to form any of your statements, much less fact.

Yes, you do have an agenda because if you simply wanted equal rights under law which you so frequently quote you wouldn't have an obsession on what that law was called.

Any person who views your posts can see that, it takes no special skill as you are not that apt at hiding it.

Is this your line of defense because my viewpoint doesn't agree with you?

I've been doing this (forums) for more then 15 years - - - starting with ICQ.

ANY Emotion you read from a post - - - comes from yourself. If you are reading emotions in a post - - they are your own.

My posts are short and to the point. If there is room for emotions in my style of posting - - I think they are hiding behind the "W" - - or maybe the "X".

I think the main issue here is social perception
why gay couples want to call their union marriage is not because somehow they like the world itself and it has very little to do with the actual definition
if they get a government union contract with all the rights a traditional marriage has why would anyone care what it is called? the answer is that what gay couples want is social acceptance, this is not an argument about semantics but about making something socially accepted.
the problem here is that you can't force something to be socially accepted by playing semantics or nitpicking definitions.
as an example, the words idiot, retarded and moronic were first used in the medical field. in time they became socially unacceptable and therefore offensive. what changed these words from medical terms to insults was dictated by society, the overall social perception.
we humans are social beings and words and how we perceive them change according to society, therefore what a word means is not always dictated by the dictionary but by its social perception. the dictionary definition is then adjusted to fit how the word is used in society.
now then its clear that forcing how a word is used while society does not accept it all in order to achieve social acceptance is not the right way to do it.
how words are used is dictated by society and society right now does not accept gay unions as the same as traditional marriages.

here is the logical argument form
1. the meaning of words change with how they are used in society
2. society controls the meaning of words
3. if society does not accept that word A means B then word A does not mean B
4. sociaty does not accept gay unions as traditional marriages
5. if society does not accept that gay unions means traditional marriage then gay union does not mean traditional marriage
therefore it would be incorrect to call gay unions the same as traditional marriages

Originally posted by Annee

No it is not on me.

It is on you to make your position clear.

if you are going to say that my argument is illogical you have to back your words
you cant'e just say its illogical because it is
thats not how it works

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Helious

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Helious
You don't care where I "think" it came from because you refuse to believe the truth.

Truth? As in God?

That is your choice - - if you want to believe that.

However - - - what you choose to believe - - - will not deny Equal Rights to others.

There will be NO "Separate but Equal". There will only be Equal.

There is no argument about religion here. It is a matter of you trying to brand a word and a tradition with something it simply is not.

FACT: There are LEGAL gay Marriages all over the world.

New tradition I guess.

Those who are Married own the word.

Roflma, legal as pertains to who? If this is the case, then why are you even upset? What else are you trying to advance? Stop trying to imagine a society where everyone is accepted for who they are, people hide things they don't want others to know every single day, a million times over, the only difference is, you have no desire to hide anything, instead, you wish to instigate, inform and then rub your differences in the face of people who couldn't care less just to agitate and try to force some sort of acceptance you will never get.

Lol, marriage between two women, between two men, totally legit because one obscure state allows it on paper for a nominal fee. Big victory, fighting the good fight I guess?

Your sexual preference is of no concern to the rest of civilized society and your force feeding of what you prefer in the bedroom will never be accepted in the main stream because sexual preference has no relevance in the real world outside of your longing to be accepted as normal.