Marriage's benefits R4 D kids, not the adults

[ScreamingEagle]

Then explain how heterosexual marriage is an inherent right.

Less than 40 years ago inter-racial marriages were illegal and many claimed that it would lead to the down fall of society (sound familiar?). Do you think mentally handicapped people should be allowed to marry and procreate?

Who is to say what the inherent rights actually are? The bigots who bark louder, the voices of reason and compassion or a happy medium?

It's an inherent right because it's been that way since oh....forever.

Yes. There is nothing wrong with the human body, unless you are Kathy Bates.

My MY...what a bigot you are...discriminating against Kathy Bates.

Anyway...since you personally believe nudists have the "right" to walk around nude on the streets, why do you think they would be arrested if they did?

 

[Taomon]

It's an inherent right because it's been that way since oh....forever.

So we should never change, never innovate, never reevaluate? Stay the same always? I suggest you give up your car, your house, your electricity and go forage in the wilderness.

My MY...what a bigot you are...discriminating against Kathy Bates.

Anyway...since you personally believe nudists have the "right" to walk around nude on the streets, why do you think they would be arrested if they did?

First of all, Kathy Bates is gross, so yeah...I will discriminate against her.

Secondly, there are ordinance laws. I don't agree with them, but Christians are such sensitive people - they get so upset if Janet Jackson flashes her nipple and what not. Give me a break. It is the human body.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

So we should never change, never innovate, never reevaluate? Stay the same always? I suggest you give up your car, your house, your electricity and go forage in the wilderness.

No, I'm saying that gay marriage is not an inherent "right".

First of all, Kathy Bates is gross, so yeah...I will discriminate against her.

Secondly, there are ordinance laws. I don't agree with them, but Christians are such sensitive people - they get so upset if Janet Jackson flashes her nipple and what not. Give me a break. It is the human body.

What a braindead liberal bigot. What gives you the "right" to discriminate against Kathy Bates…..at least in your platitudinous liberal world of "equality" and "anti-discrimination"?

Oh, I see....if there were none of those nasty Christians around fucking things up you could blithely walk the streets naked? Then tell me why is it they don't allow street nudity in the non-Christian worlds of China or Japan?

 

[Taomon]

No, I'm saying that gay marriage is not an inherent "right".

Yes, but based on what? Because of archaic beliefs? I am sorry to inform you but, because something has been a certain way since ever is not a good enough reason to refuse to consider alternatives.

Homosexuality is as old as huma existance. Why do you suppose that is? Now who are you to say that they do not have an inherent right to marry and you do? I say, if an official is willing to marry a couple, any couple, let them marry. How does that affect you or me?

What a braindead liberal bigot. What gives you the "right" to discriminate against Kathy Bates…..at least in your platitudinous liberal world of "equality" and "anti-discrimination?

Hev you seen Kathy Bates? I suggest you rent "About Schmidt" and then tell me how wrong I am.

Oh, I see....if there were none of those nasty Christians around fucking things up you could blithely walk the streets naked? Then tell me why is it they don't allow street nudity in the non-Christian world of China or Japan?

I cannot speak for Chinese law, but I know what drives American law. Why do we have the Indecency bill again? Do you remember?

 

[mattskramer]

The POINT is that gay marriage is not an inherent "right" as claimed by liberals who are trying to define the argument based on false assumptions…as stated in LuvRPGrl's original post (point #2) .

What is an inherent right? Who came up with inherent rights? Who is to say what is an inherent right – our forefathers – the same ones who owned slaves and prohibited women form voting.

There is no such thing as an inherent right except in the imagination of people. People can imagine whatever inherent rights that they want to create.

 

[Taomon]

What is an inherent right? Who came up with inherent rights? Who is to say what is an inherent right – our forefathers – the same ones who owned slaves and prohibited women form voting.

There is no such thing as an inherent right except in the imagination of people. People can imagine whatever inherent rights that they want to create.

I am with that brother.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Yes, but based on what? Because of archaic beliefs? I am sorry to inform you but, because something has been a certain way since ever is not a good enough reason to refuse to consider alternatives.

Homosexuality is as old as huma existance. Why do you suppose that is? Now who are you to say that they do not have an inherent right to marry and you do? I say, if an official is willing to marry a couple, any couple, let them marry. How does that affect you or me?

"Archaic beliefs"? Hah! Most Americans TODAY do not want gay marriage.

Prostitution is also "as old as human existence". That doesn't give it any "right" to exist either.

Hev you seen Kathy Bates? I suggest you rent "About Schmidt" and then tell me how wrong I am.

I cannot speak for Chinese law, but I know what drives American law. Why do we have the Indecency bill again? Do you remember?

Sure I've seen her…fat ass and all. But seeing as you're a liberal, where do you get off being discriminatory like that?

I'm not asking for a Chinese legal brief. However, they are a SECULAR society.....same as you libs want here in America. So, being a secular society with NO Christians, they STILL don't allow nudes in the streets. Perhaps the choice to not allow public nudity has nothing specific to do with the Christian religion after all?

You mean the recent FCC bill signed by Bush? A fine bill….a step in the right direction to protect the general public - and especially our children - against indecent words and nude exposure. Pretty much the same as protecting the public from people walking down the street naked.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

What is an inherent right? Who came up with inherent rights? Who is to say what is an inherent right – our forefathers – the same ones who owned slaves and prohibited women form voting.

There is no such thing as an inherent right except in the imagination of people. People can imagine whatever inherent rights that they want to create.

So I take it you admit that gay marriage is not an inherent right?

You're at least right that "people can imagine whatever inherent rights they want to create".....obviously that's what the gays are doing....

 

[Ravi]

The POINT is that gay marriage is not an inherent "right" as claimed by liberals who are trying to define the argument based on false assumptions…as stated in LuvRPGrl's original post (point #2) .

I've never known anyone, liberal or otherwise, that claimed marriage of any type is an inherent right.

But don't let that stop you from saying it, Smeagle.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I've never known anyone, liberal or otherwise, that claimed marriage of any type is an inherent right.

But don't let that stop you from saying it, Smeagle.

If it's not inherent, then where did the "right" to gay marriage come from?

 

[Ravi]

If it's not inherent, then where did the "right" to gay marriage come from?

There is no right to any kind of marriage. You just can't say one group has the right and the other group does not. All or nothing, baby.

 

[mattskramer]

"Archaic beliefs"? Hah! Most Americans TODAY do not want gay marriage.

Prostitution is also "as old as human existence". That doesn't give it any "right" to exist either.

I see so many fallacies sneaking in here. Let me show you the light.

Just because something has a tradition – a history – does not mean that such a thing should not be changed. Read about the “appeal to tradition”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition

Just because something is popular or unpopular does not make it right or wrong. Read about “appeal to majority”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_majority

You mean the recent FCC bill signed by Bush? A fine bill….a step in the right direction to protect the general public - and especially our children - against indecent words and nude exposure. Pretty much the same as protecting the public from people walking down the street naked.

Aren’t you a Republican or at least a conservative? I did not realize that you condone government intrusion into the private lives of families. Shouldn’t it be the parents’ duty to raise his or her child as he or she sees fit. Who is big nanny-state government (big brother) to tell me what I may or may not see – or what I may or may not allow my child to see?!?

I guess that everyone supports government intrusion – the only difference is what type of intrusion you support.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

There is no right to any kind of marriage. You just can't say one group has the right and the other group does not. All or nothing, baby.

No right to any kind of marriage? Sure thing bro...tell that to society at large....for the past ten eons or so...

Get real.

 

[mattskramer]

If it's not inherent, then where did the "right" to gay marriage come from?

Where did the "right" to heterosexual marriage come from?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I see so many fallacies sneaking in here. Let me show you the light.

Just because something has a tradition – a history – does not mean that such a thing should not be changed. Read about the “appeal to tradition”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition

Just because something is popular or unpopular does not make it right or wrong. Read about “appeal to majority”.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_majority

I'm not saying that tradition or "appeal to the majority" cannot be changed. I'm saying that gay marriage is not an inherent "right".

Aren’t you a Republican or at least a conservative? I did not realize that you condone government intrusion into the private lives of families. Shouldn’t it be the parents’ duty to raise his or her child as he or she sees fit. Who is big nanny-state government (big brother) to tell me what I may or may not see – or what I may or may not allow my child to see?!?

I guess that everyone supports government intrusion – the only difference is what type of intrusion you support.

I don't believe living in an openly sleezy garbage world.
I believe that we, as a society, have the right to live free of that.

Where did the "right" to heterosexual marriage come from?

Inherent from history....eons of history.

 

[mattskramer]

I'm not saying that tradition or "appeal to the majority" cannot be changed. I'm saying that gay marriage is not an inherent "right".

There is that phrase again. What is an inherent right and where did it come from? Does it really exist outside of people’s imagination?

I don't believe living in an openly sleezy garbage world.
I believe that we, as a society, have the right to live free of that.

I would draw the line at letting people walk nude in public. It is difficult to avoid seeing people in public. At least there are private communes and beaches where people who like that can go. On the other hand, it is easy to avoid seeing things on the television or on the computer that you don’t want to see. Change the channel or the web site. Watch the “700 Club”. It is easy to avoid seeing things in print that you don’t want to see. If you don’t like what you read, get “Reader’s Digest”. I might like late night “Talk Sex” shows or read “Penthouse”.

Again, if you want to live “free of that”, stay away from nude beaches and don’t look at pornography, but leave it for people who might like such garbage.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

There is that phrase again. What is an inherent right and where did it come from? Does it really exist outside of people’s imagination?

See last post.

I would draw the line at letting people walk nude in public. It is difficult to avoid seeing people in public. At least there are private communes and beaches where people who like that can go. On the other hand, it is easy to avoid seeing things on the television or on the computer that you don’t want to see. Change the channel or the web site. Watch the “700 Club”. It is easy to avoid seeing things in print that you don’t want to see. If you don’t like what you read, get “Reader’s Digest”. I might like late night “Talk Sex” shows or read “Penthouse”.

Again, if you want to live “free of that”, stay away from nude beaches and don’t look at pornography, but leave it for people who might like such garbage.

Even a liberal-leaner like you will draw a line. Guess it's only a matter of where we, as a society, want to draw it.

Allowing a minority group of porn producers to suffuse general society with their filth on the basis of "free speech" is nothing more than the destruction of society by the far left and the misguided notions of libertarians.

 

[mattskramer]

Inherent from history....eons of history.

You did not answer the question: Give me your definition. What is an inherent right? You mention the word "history".

You used the word "history". Do you mean that an inherent right is a right stemming from traditional practice? If so than is it an inherent right to prohibit women from voting? Anyway, again, you are simply appealing to history.

 

[mattskramer]

Allowing a minority group of porn producers to suffuse general society with their filth on the basis of "free speech" is nothing more than the destruction of society by the far left and the misguided notions of libertarians.

I support it on the basis of "free market" principles along with freedom of speech. It does not lead to the destruction of society to any greater extent than does your desire to prohibit it lead to the repression of society.

 

[jillian]

Aren’t you a Republican or at least a conservative? I did not realize that you condone government intrusion into the private lives of families.

Haven't you noticed SE's one of those insane religious righters who believes in fire and brimstone and that G-d is going to strike down all of us heathens while he and his ilk get swept away in a pool of glory? In the meantime, though, he thinks its his G-d-given right to tell the rest of us what to do, because heaven forbid we all shouldn't live by his rules.

Shouldn’t it be the parents’ duty to raise his or her child as he or she sees fit. Who is big nanny-state government (big brother) to tell me what I may or may not see – or what I may or may not allow my child to see?!?

I guess that everyone supports government intrusion – the only difference is what type of intrusion you support.

Yeah... when it comes to corporations, societal good, education, old people, sick people, poor people, then he wants government to be hands off.... but telling us who we can love, what we can do with our bodies, etc... then he's all for government intrusion.