Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[Anima]

You don't get to reference the first amendment in an attempt to refute the way others perceive you.

Again, no argument needs to be brought forth in their favor.  You need to provide a compelling case to the contrary.  You have yet to do so.

I do get to utilize the 1st amendment in regards to an accusation of hate speech, which is not determined subjectively according to people's opinions. I may further utilize tortious defamation in defense to a false defamatory statement in regards to my person (in this case it would be liable as it is expressed in a more permanent medium than speech).

You keep saying no argument is needed in their favor but a compelling case needs to be brought to the contrary? Why is that? If you do not have to convince opponents of your position than they do not have to convince you of theirs. I have made compelling argument, now you say you are not compelled by the arguments made, which endeavors to denigrate the argument to one of subjective satisfaction. Thus if you do not want to believe it no argument will convince you and if I do not want to believe it no argument will convince me.

I have come to the discussion with arguments and endeavoring to make a point. You have come with nothing other than insults and claim since you are not convinced than you have won? It seems quite readily you are unable to refute my arguments with arguments of your own. Hell you are not even willing to make arguments of your own.

"Any fool can criticize and most fools do." - Benjamin Franklin

With that said do you just not have an argument not based on false equivalency? Even a non-compelling one?