Holy shit! Seriously! After being missing for a couple of days you come back with this shit while editing out the main part of my post that you don't want to deal with.?? Once again, my problem is with present day people who choose to interpret marriage as being exclusively between a man and a woman. I never concerned myself with the origins and purpose of marriage which has been re-interpreted many times over.. Now here are the questions that I asked and that you are avoiding -once again:
I've asked you specific questions on a number of occasions which you have either avoided entirely, or gave some kind of bullshit answer. I'll try again:.....
Deal with it!!
Yeah, after your massive dishonesty, I'm not finding it in me, to be able to pretend to take your words with any weight what so ever.
I'll check back in a couple of days. Maybe my disappointment in you will recede back to normal levels.
Furthermore...I reiterate. All that you have is your appeal to tradition-clinging to your position that whoever the hell it was that "invented" marriage intended it to be between a man and a women for the purpose of producing children . Then you use that to claim that the courts were wrong to rule that bans on same sex marriage were arbitrary and discriminatory.
Then, instead of dealing with the discriminatory intent of present day lawmakers in passing those bans, you want me to delve into the origins and history of marriage and explore the intent of the ancients. All the while ignoring the real damage that is done to people as the result of the discrimination that you advocate. You have nothing!
Caring for the children. Children are produced fairly easily. Proper care for them, is far harder.
You ignore the damage done to this country, by people like you, with your divisive tactics.
What the **** are you talking about now? What damage?
You took an beloved institution, and managed to convince half the population, that anyone that did not support immediate and radical change to the institution, was a hateful bigot.
That turned large percentages of Americans against their family and friends, tearing apart this country, for your ideological and/or partisan gain.
Get the **** over the histrionics . You are being whinny and ridiculous. Most people have moved on. The beloved institution of marriage is alive and well and better off for being more inclusive. It was not a "radical change" Prior to Obergefell, marriage was the union between two consenting adults who desired to be with each other, Now, it is still the union of two consenting adults who desire to be with each other but without regards to what they have between their respective legs.
Were you this distraught when the institution of marriage was deemed by the high court to no longer be between two people of the same race? If not, please explain how this is different.
The country is not being torn apart over same sex marriage . The country is being torn apart by the bigotry and intolerance that you and your ilk perpetuate .
Yes, some families have experienced a rift over it, but many more families and children have benefited by the ability of same sex couples to marry and to provide a home with two married legal parents to those children-something that you reuse to acknowledge . More families people are torn apart bigotry and hate than by acceptance and inclusion. You are living in a dark and lonely place devoid of any real understanding of todays society.
Society evolves. Institutions like marriage evolve. Stagnation is death. I had said that I was not going to delve into the history and purpose of marriage as envision by those -who ever the **** they were- who "invented it" and I wont. But I will again say that none of that is relevant now. I do not hold those people responsible for the discriminatory nature of marriage as it was. They were a product of their time.
I hold YOU and those who cling to the ancient and exclusionary aspects of marriage as an excuse to discriminate in the present day responsible. Perhaps that is the answer to the big question that you have been accusing me of refusing to answer.
Now for the questions that you have been too much of a coward to answer yet again for the 4th time
1. Can same sex couple function as a family-full fill all necessary roles - and do all of the same things that opposite sex couples do? If no please explain.
2.What negative or unintended consequences has there been for society or for individuals as a result of same sex marriage.
3. You brought up procreation at one point-it was mentioned in that Heritage Foundation rag. Is your opposition to same sex marriage based in part on the fact that two people of the same sex can't produce a child entirely on their own? If so, do you oppose the marriages of opposite sex couples who for whatever reason cannot have a child without some help?
4. You're hung up on traditional gender specific roles and base your opposition to same sex marriage on "men and women being different" because people need to bring complimentary roles to a relationship. Do you also oppose the marriage of opposite sex coupes where -shall we say the woman- does not adhere to traditional female roles.?
5. The institution of marriage has changed many ways over the years from how women are viewed and their status, to interracial marriage and many other aspects of it. Do you disagree with those changes and think that the institution should remain the same and not evolve, or is it only same sex marriage that you have a problem with? If so why exactly?
