Login

**Ravenshire** · July 18, 2018 at 5:18 pm

(July 18, 2018 at 5:06 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: I would continue, but I feel like you guys will just offer the same arguments that you just turned down a moment ago. I can’t keep up with eqivocating terms, Andy shifting arguments.

And yet you use equivocation and shifty arguments...

Amarok · (This post was last modified: July 18, 2018 at 5:23 pm by Amarok.)

Quote:I would continue, but I feel like you guys will just offer the same arguments that you just turned down a moment ago.

Too bad we won't because they are nothing alike

Quote: I can’t keep up with eqivocating terms, Andy shifting arguments.

Nope you can't keep up with good arguments that damn your nonsense and you keep trying to muddy the water

RoadRunner79 · July 18, 2018 at 5:34 pm

(July 18, 2018 at 4:43 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:
(July 18, 2018 at 4:40 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Perhaps...because married bachelors isn;t a thing and gay marriage isn't bestiality? Just throwing that out there, lol.

Now, correct me if i;m wrong, but..you;re in favor of gay marriage, correct? You see no reason to oppose any state sanction. So sleep easy tonight. Those christians who do find reason...and there are many can give no other answer than their vaguely worded bigotries fobbed off on a god.
Consider married bachelor is contradiction and yes comparing gay marriage to marrying non humans is also an absurd comparison

Once again.... I wasn't making a comparison. I do think they are different, and different from two people of the opposite sex being joined in marriage. They are different, and therefore not equal. I would argue that these things do not all need to be treated the same, because they are different, and only one meets the definition of marriage.

And you keep using the word "absurd". I agree, and would point out, that is the intention of an argument from absurdity. That following the same reasoning, leads to an absurd conclusion in another instance. When I use the same arguments, and you call it absurd.... I agree. That was the point. I would also point out, that similar rebuttals where used (arguing that those things don't fit the definition of marriage). Same arguments, same rebuttals... only the subjects changed (and who was arguing what).

Amarok · July 18, 2018 at 5:36 pm

Quote:Once again.... I wasn't making a comparison. I do think they are different, and different from two people of the opposite sex being joined in marriage. They are different, and therefore not equal. I would argue that these things do not all need to be treated the same, because they are different, and only one meets the definition of marriage.

And you keep using the word "absurd". I agree, and would point out, that is the intention of an argument from absurdity. That following the same reasoning, leads to an absurd conclusion in another instance. When I use the same arguments, and you call it absurd.... I agree. That was the point. I would also point out, that similar rebuttals where used (arguing that those things don't fit the definition of marriage). Same arguments, same rebuttals... only the subjects changed (and who was arguing what).

The same long broken rant with the answers applying to it

**The Grand Nudger** · (This post was last modified: July 18, 2018 at 5:42 pm by The Grand Nudger.)

(July 18, 2018 at 5:34 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:
(July 18, 2018 at 4:43 pm)Tizheruk Wrote: Consider married bachelor is contradiction and yes comparing gay marriage to marrying non humans is also an absurd comparison

Once again.... I wasn't making a comparison. I do think they are different, and different from two people of the opposite sex being joined in marriage.

There we go. Why carry water for bigots, then? You know it;s different...and....you know why it;s bigotry. Additionally...you;re not one of Those People™...so....?

Quote:They are different, and therefore not equal. I would argue that these things do not all need to be treated the same, because they are different, and only one meets the definition of marriage.

The one where two adults enter into a contractual arrangement? Right?

Quote:And you keep using the word "absurd". I agree, and would point out, that is the intention of an argument from absurdity. That following the same reasoning, leads to an absurd conclusion in another instance. When I use the same arguments, and you call it absurd.... I agree. That was the point. I would also point out, that similar rebuttals where used (arguing that those things don't fit the definition of marriage). Same arguments, same rebuttals... only the subjects changed (and who was arguing what).

The subjects are not alike, as you agree above, and gay marriage fits the definition of marriage in all ways relevant to us law. This put;s inclined christers in a pickle. They can say "godsaidso" to which anyone familiar with our laws will laugh...or they can attempt, and fail, to justify their opposition outside of their religious beliefs.

What to do....what....to....do?

Amarok · July 18, 2018 at 5:41 pm

(July 18, 2018 at 5:39 pm)Khemikal Wrote:
(July 18, 2018 at 5:34 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Once again.... I wasn't making a comparison. I do think they are different, and different from two people of the opposite sex being joined in marriage.
There we go. Why carry water for bigots, then? You know it;s different...and....you know why it;s bigotry. Additionally...you;re not one of Those People™...so....?

Quote:They are different, and therefore not equal. I would argue that these things do not all need to be treated the same, because they are different, and only one meets the definition of marriage.
The one where two adults enter into a contractual arrangement? Right?

Quote:And you keep using the word "absurd". I agree, and would point out, that is the intention of an argument from absurdity. That following the same reasoning, leads to an absurd conclusion in another instance. When I use the same arguments, and you call it absurd.... I agree. That was the point. I would also point out, that similar rebuttals where used (arguing that those things don't fit the definition of marriage). Same arguments, same rebuttals... only the subjects changed (and who was arguing what).
The subjects are not alike, as you agree above, and gay marriage fits the definition of marriage in all ways relevant to us law.

I wonder if he even reads our responses?

RoadRunner79 · (This post was last modified: July 18, 2018 at 5:42 pm by RoadRunner79.)

(July 18, 2018 at 5:39 pm)Khemikal Wrote:
(July 18, 2018 at 5:34 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Once again.... I wasn't making a comparison. I do think they are different, and different from two people of the opposite sex being joined in marriage.
There we go. Why carry water for bigots, then? You know it;s different...and....you know why it;s bigotry. Additionally...you;re not one of Those People™...so....?

Quote:They are different, and therefore not equal. I would argue that these things do not all need to be treated the same, because they are different, and only one meets the definition of marriage.
The one where two adults enter into a contractual arrangement? Right?

Quote:And you keep using the word "absurd". I agree, and would point out, that is the intention of an argument from absurdity. That following the same reasoning, leads to an absurd conclusion in another instance. When I use the same arguments, and you call it absurd.... I agree. That was the point. I would also point out, that similar rebuttals where used (arguing that those things don't fit the definition of marriage). Same arguments, same rebuttals... only the subjects changed (and who was arguing what).
The subjects are not alike, as you agree above.

Only a problem for knuckle dragging regressive types. In post modernism, we don't acknowledge such things, and everyone is equal. We don't distinguish between man, woman, or toaster (or discriminate against such things). You just re-define the terms to fit what you want.

**The Grand Nudger** · (This post was last modified: July 18, 2018 at 5:45 pm by The Grand Nudger.)

(July 18, 2018 at 5:42 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote:
(July 18, 2018 at 5:39 pm)Khemikal Wrote: There we go. Why carry water for bigots, then? You know it;s different...and....you know why it;s bigotry. Additionally...you;re not one of Those People™...so....?

The one where two adults enter into a contractual arrangement? Right?

The subjects are not alike, as you agree above.

Only a problem for knuckle dragging regressive types. In post modernism, we don't acknowledge such things, and everyone is equal.

Says who, lol?

Quote:We don't distinguish between man, woman, or toaster (or discriminate against such things). You just re-define the terms to fit what you want.

When the distinction serves no immediate justifiable purpose, what;s the point? Further...post modernism doesn;t state that you and I are equals. It states that the law should treat us as such even though I;m clearly your superior.

It should. You were born that way, after all. Wink

Amarok · (This post was last modified: July 18, 2018 at 5:53 pm by Amarok.)

Quote:Only a problem for knuckle dragging regressive types. In post modernism, we don't acknowledge such things, and everyone is equal.

Again pure derp

Quote:We don't distinguish between man, woman, or toaster (or discriminate against such things). You just re-define the terms to fit what you want.

And straw man

I think Roads finally lost it

RoadRunner79 · July 18, 2018 at 6:35 pm

(July 18, 2018 at 5:52 pm)Tizheruk Wrote:
Quote:Only a problem for knuckle dragging regressive types. In post modernism, we don't acknowledge such things, and everyone is equal.
Again pure derp

Quote:We don't distinguish between man, woman, or toaster (or discriminate against such things). You just re-define the terms to fit what you want.
And straw man

I think Roads finally lost it

Ok, the. We do acknowledge differences, and can discriminate between them. I agree

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread		Author	Replies	Views	Last Post
	It Must Kill These Baptist Shitballs.	Minimalist	49	10496	April 17, 2018 at 5:53 am Last Post: Pat Mustard
	Atheists, Who would You Rather Have as a Neighbor	Rhondazvous	56	8933	November 18, 2017 at 6:11 am Last Post: Aoi Magi
	Theists, Who would You Rather Have as a Neighbor	Rhondazvous	23	8376	November 10, 2017 at 6:44 pm Last Post: vorlon13
	If Jesus is not true	Sonah	41	10037	October 9, 2017 at 7:02 pm Last Post: Nay_Sayer
	My dad wants me to marry another christian	Der/die AtheistIn	40	9235	September 23, 2017 at 3:04 pm Last Post: mordant
	Why Jesus is not the messiah.	Creed of Heresy	59	15665	December 30, 2016 at 5:27 pm Last Post: Egyptian
	Christians - even the Bible says that Jesus was not God so why do you say he was ?	jenny1972	299	54248	November 3, 2015 at 8:07 pm Last Post: jenny1972
	"Thou shall not kill" commandment is hypocritical?	pocaracas	92	20067	August 26, 2015 at 10:43 am Last Post: Mr Greene
	Would this be all we need to prove God exists? Or would it require more than this?	IanHulett	30	6457	January 21, 2015 at 1:47 pm Last Post: watchamadoodle
	being told to kill myself by someone who supposedly believe in God	mainethinker	266	47869	January 18, 2015 at 12:47 am Last Post: Mental Outlaw