Ok I will get to it this afternoon or by tonight. The lovely thing called work has to be done now. Break time is over.
I mean think about it, how the hell am I going to pay for my cable that gives me the Internet ?! Hmmm.

(August 25, 2015 at 2:12 pm)Rhythm Wrote: You assume that I (or we) must defend a position of equality, and that is where you fail.  But please, continue.

One must defend a position of equality otherwise be guilty of false equivalency. You must be able to make argument for why two different things are to be treated equally and may not simply assume because they are alike in one regard than they are to be alike in all regards.

This premise of equality has been readily refuted numerous times in this thread and is recognized as false in preferential (held as discriminatory in their favor) and discriminatory (which is held to be discriminatory against them) treatment of children, disabled, minorities, elderly, and criminals. All of these persons are alike in part, but are recognized as not being treated equally in all regards.

You must provide argument for why one should be treated equal to another in a specific regard since we are fully aware they are not to be treated equally in every regard without consideration of their particular qualities. Presently the argument which have been supplied either incorporate entire groups of persons which are not desired or assume equivalency without giving argument in support of that assumption.

I have repeatedly asked for an argument in their favor not based on false equivalency and I look forward to seeing one shortly.

We interrupt whatever this is for a quick word from our sponsors:

(August 25, 2015 at 3:17 pm)Anima Wrote:

(August 25, 2015 at 2:12 pm)Rhythm Wrote: You assume that I (or we) must defend a position of equality, and that is where you fail.  But please, continue.

One must defend a position of equality otherwise be guilty of false equivalency.  You must be able to make argument for why two different things are to be treated equally and may not simply assume because they are alike in one regard than they are to be alike in all regards.

This premise of equality has been readily refuted numerous times in this thread and is recognized as false in preferential (held as discriminatory in their favor) and discriminatory (which is held to be discriminatory against them) treatment of children, disabled, minorities, elderly, and criminals.  All of these persons are alike in part, but are recognized as not being treated equally in all regards.  

You must provide argument for why one should be treated equal to another in a specific regard since we are fully aware they are not to be treated equally in every regard without consideration of their particular qualities.  Presently the argument which have been supplied either incorporate entire groups of persons which are not desired or assume equivalency without giving argument in support of that assumption.  

I have repeatedly asked for an argument in their favor not based on false equivalency and I look forward to seeing one shortly.

I wasn't aware that gay people were "different things" relative to any other type of person.  Please, continue with your riveting and thoroughly well reasoned arguments. So, because gay people are different than..idk.....what, straight people, regular people, standard people, all people....equality isn't a given? Fascinating. Tell me, as you elaborate, do you happen to have red hair or blonde hair, answer carefully...your equality is on the line, after all. You feel comfortable excluding the one group over the other, on this or that grounds, also fascinating. Perhaps you'd be willing to describe what you might exclude your own group from (or what your group is excluded from by another), relative to the "gay group"..whatever that group, your group, is? Is there something that I am entitled to that you are not, or that gay people, because they're different things, are entitled to that you are not? I don't really care to argue whatever those things are, just trying to gauge which way the river flows, as it were.

(August 25, 2015 at 2:06 pm)Ace Wrote:

(August 25, 2015 at 1:56 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Why don't we start with you listing the downside of marriage equality -- by which I mean something other than 'my imaginary friend is as disgusted by homosexuality as I am'.

And I didn't write anything about "billions or trillions" of people being displaced.

Damn again,
Dude he has argued and presented an opposing view on the issue. Hell this thread is of that. Well mostly the end part. It might be faster to just read the old post them for him to retype the whole damn thing. But hey he might be up for it, who knows.

Right?! I have already made these arguments. So here are the links which I found.

1. http://atheistforums.org/thread-33691-po...pid1020898 (On Homosexuality being Genetic defect to be prohibited or avoided).

2. http://atheistforums.org/thread-33691-po...pid1020293 (On State interest in specific relationships)

3. http://atheistforums.org/thread-33691-po...pid1016275 (Summary of Biological argument, Physical Harm, and Meta-physical harm made for Jenny).

Your argument, all 93 pages worth, was nothing more then, and nothing more now... than a fear of gaymaggedon...and if you find that compelling that's your business.  Who am I to tell you what to quiver in your boots about?  Better make those walls thick though, I hear that some of the homos are hung.

What else, beyond marriage, do you think we should exclude the gays from? What other items do you feel their different-ness warrants removal or prohibition of? How about cheesecake....can they eat cheesecake, or would that bring about the wrath of heaven , ahem...excuse me, "the collapse of society" as well?

(August 25, 2015 at 3:25 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I wasn't aware that gay people were "different things" relative to any other type of person.  Please, continue with your riveting and thoroughly well reasoned arguments.  So, because gay people are different than..idk.....what, straight people, regular people, standard people, equality isn't a given?  Fascinating.  Tell me, as you elaborate, do you happen to have red hair or blonde hair, answer carefully...your equality is on the line, after all.  You feel comfortable excluding the one group over the other, on this or that grounds, also fascinating.  Tell me, what do you exclude your own group from..whatever that group is?

Well as a native american I am a protected class which happens to have black hair. Up until about 50 years ago my people were treated as property of the government of the united states and were not permitted to work or live outside of the reservation or military bases. We have not been treated equally historically and are not treated equally to this day (reservations do not have to obey state laws, but are bound by federal laws. Reservations are not permitted to engage in international trader or have international boarders. Reservations are not permitted to establish exclusive trade deals among one another, to educated their own children, etcetera). Also, unlike some groups we were actually slaughtered, infected, enslaved, imprisoned, and forced into effectual internment camps (reservations), and given enrollment numbers were the majority of us remain to this day. So I am a little familiar with preferential and discriminatory treatment.

Needless to say when I hear arguments of false equivalency I recognize them to be exactly that...FALSE!

Now in regards to your questions about false equivalency I am indeed fine with excluding groups based on particular qualities. The infantile should not be treated as the senile; the virtuous should not be treated the same as the vicious; the disabled should not be treated as the abled. To do endeavor to do so denigrates the superior and denies the inferior; when we should encourage the former and discourage the latter.

It is at this point where discussion then begins in order to determine the qualities of various groups and the civic duties and privileges they should be allowed to exercise.

(August 25, 2015 at 3:46 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Your argument, all 93 pages worth, was nothing more then, and nothing more now... than a fear of gaymaggedon...and if you find that compelling that's your business.  Who am I to tell you what to quiver in your boots about?  Better make those walls thick though, I hear that some of the homos are hung.

What else, beyond marriage, do you think we should exclude the gays from?  What other items do you feel their different-ness warrants removal or prohibition of?  How about cheesecake....can they eat cheesecake, or would that bring about the wrath of heaven , ahem...excuse me, "the collapse of society" as well?

Slippery slope much?

Or are we willing to admit that being denied somethings is not being denied everything?

I have had the dubious honors of:
1. Being randomly selected every time I fly. It is not very random for me
2. Being pulled over and handcuffed for being too dark skinned in an affluent neighborhood.
3. Being followed around the store to make sure I do not steal anything.
4. Being told the service was for customers only while holding a bag of an item I just purchased in that store.
5. Handcuffed for walking down the street at night because I fit the brown male description.
6. Had to prove my citizenship status, though I am a registered native american who can trace his family line in north america all the way back to 1400s.
7. Asked what I was doing away from my reservation (which is two states away) and in this part of town?
8. Having security called because I was waiting for my fiancee (she is white) to come out of the restroom and they were concerned I was brown guy stalking her (I thought it was funny. She was really pissed and offended).
9. Oh, and we cannot forget "the talk" about how to not get unnecessarily shot by police. Four words for you. COMPLY AND MOVE SLOWLY!!!

(August 25, 2015 at 4:09 pm)Anima Wrote: I have had the dubious honors of:
1.  Being randomly selected every time I fly.  It is not very random for me
2.  Being pulled over and handcuffed for being too dark skinned in an affluent neighborhood.
3.  Being followed around the store to make sure I do not steal anything.
4.  Being told the service was for customers only while holding a bag of an item I just purchased in that store.
5.  Handcuffed for walking down the street at night because I fit the brown male description.
6.  Had to prove my citizenship status, though I am a registered native american who can trace his family line in north america all the way back to 1400s.
7.  Asked what I was doing away from my reservation (which is two states away) and in this part of town?
8.  Having security called because I was waiting for my fiancee (she is white) to come out of the restroom and they were concerned I was brown guy stalking her (I thought it was funny.  She was really pissed and offended).
9.  Oh, and we cannot forget "the talk" about how to not get unnecessarily shot by police.  Four words for you.  COMPLY AND MOVE SLOWLY!!!

Hahaha, thank you Anima!!!!

Jeeez, And I always thought that white people could some how senses I was a bigot and that is why they treat colors like that, you know, because of their bigotry. NO FUCKING WAY . . You are telling me that it was because of my fucking skin color. . . no, no, no you just a hater, an anti color prick, you just want to deny you fellow bigotry clan. You bigoted trader.