Gay marriage

suspiria said:
Maybe they dont think its harmful!! And its there choice!!

It is their choice. So here's where you stand, based on your posts in this thread:
1. Harmful behavior should be regulated/prohibited.
2. Non-harmful behavior should not be regulated/prohibited.
3. Harm is determined by the person exhibiting the behavior.

So, by your logic, if I want to drive the wrong way down the freeway in a Hummer 2, that's cool, because I don't think it's gonna harm me! Am I right?
 
suspiria said:
Are you kidding, how can you even compare the two?? Your really reaching!! You really want to believe being gay is wrong, believe it then, who cares!! I just have a differnt point of view!


I am not comparing anything at all. What I stated is that because somebody "thinks" something is not harmful doesn't mean that laws should be changed to reflect their view, that there can be a difference between reality and what they think.

Basically what I was stating is think before you speak, the argument is fallacious.

Amazingly I am on your side of the argument, I just want you to argue more clearly...
 
MyName said:
My 3 year old baby just had the most interesting dialogue with a frog.
it was cute.
so is she.
she talked with the frog? which one?
 
well, I tried to avert the subject like the good little fence sitter that I am?

Now I shall bow out lest I get hit with any of the :poop: being flung about!

Have a happy day!
 
MyName said:
:cuckoo:

ACK!!!!!!!!!! watch out MM! You might entice DK aka 'smarter' into defining for us once again how morals are a subjective thing....
:banana2:
 
gop_jeff said:
What everyone believes about God is irrelevant. The existence of God does not depend on the beliefs of His creation.
Yes its relevent, because if he does not exist then how can he decide whether something is a sin??
 
actually wait....

One thing -

To whom it may concern:

Do not argue religion or God with Jeff. He'll smack you down each time, as he is the most knowledgable person I know on the subject.

I wont even argue it with him, and I argue it with everyone.
I know to be humbled in the presence of greatness.

:)
 
MyName said:
Go back to work damnit - Im going shopping and need the $
we dont need your peanut gallery input here
:teeth:
 
MyName said:
actually wait....

One thing -

To whom it may concern:

Do not argue religion or God with Jeff. He'll smack you down each time, as he is the most knowledgable person I know on the subject.

I wont even argue it with him, and I argue it with everyone.
I know to be humbled in the presence of greatness.

:)

(blushing)

Aw... shucks...

(looks down, kicks rock)
 
(the proper response would be to give me the rep and send the check that you promised me Id get if I said that)

:teeth:
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: dmp
I am still waiting for an explanation of why the Government should be involved in defining Marriage at all...

Other than making clear laws against specific marriages that would victimize children, or animals, what would make it the Government's place to define Marriage at all?
 
no1tovote4 said:
I am still waiting for an explanation of why the Government should be involved in defining Marriage at all...

Government has a duty to protect its citizens, society, from obviously harmfull practices...therefore Gov't should reward those unions which are beneficial...such as 'The Family'.
 
MyName said:
(the proper response would be to give me the rep and send the check that you promised me Id get if I said that)

:teeth:

vBulletin Message
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MyName again.

Check your control panel... :)
 

Forum List

Back
Top