Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[Ace]

As I have already stated in a previous post.  I would endeavor for all non-desirable conditions or traits to:
1.  Correct, prevent, or eliminate if possible (by this I mean humanely possible)
2.  If not possible I would integrate to the degree reasonable (by this I mean to provide aid to integrate into the society as is and not to change the society for a very small minority).
3.  If integration is not possible than I would incarcerate, ostracize, and if necessary exterminate (if it is a threat which cannot be contained or left alone then it must be exterminated less.)

I would assume they may be dealt with in steps 1 or 2.  But if it were necessary I would not preclude step 3.  Though I loath to do so.

So while we're on the subject of slippery slopes...

Do you guys think that religious conviction naturally leads to murderous intent toward other humans, or do you think there's some third causative factor that just happens to tend eugenicists/rape apologists/homicidal people toward religion?

Sort of like the whole video games argument...do they make people violent, or is it just that violent people like to play them?

Really?  Because that veil dropped about 30 or 40 pages ago.

Again you should not paint a last resort as if it were a first resort.

And you should not paint your favorite resort as a last resort just to be able to later make the argument that it's your last resort. Not that I would presume upon your beliefs...I'm just saying...IF you are doing that...you shouldn't. Just saying.

If you read the argument full he say's what steps are taken and why they are and why in to order set.