RE: Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet
June 13, 2015 at 3:35 pm
(This post was last modified: June 13, 2015 at 3:40 pm by Ace.)
(June 13, 2015 at 3:01 pm)robvalue Wrote: I'm all for discussion, but I'm not sure why you are so determined to convince us it's a bad idea. Especially as people like me know squat about law, and I can't really debate someone who is providing the facts about the law while telling me I'm wrong. I hope you appreciate that's rather difficult for me.
The courts are going to decide soon (I expect) and if they don't allow this, then religion and/or legal red tape are blocking the removal of blatant discrimination. The fact that anyone is trying to convince themselves this isn't discrimination is beyond me.
It would be more interesting to hear why you really oppose it, assuming you do.
PS point taken, I knew as I was writing it announcing I know what is right is a bit hollow! Should have cut that bit.
In asking, “Why I oppose the issue” (that is if I actually do which is neither here or there) It seems to me that those who oppose must be doing so for religious reason. However, I say the hell with religion, F#) (*@) (* the G.O.D. and J.C., whoever! (Sorry for any who are religious I truly mean not to disrespect, but to try to abstain information and understanding)
Is it not my right to say I oppose homosexual sex as I oppose threesome, one night stands, incest, orgies, SM (which can be argued, is done by both straight and gay alike) If one does not agree with the sexual act, dose religion have to be the reason why? Or is one not allowed not to accept what one may not find to their like?
I do remember Anima offering to argue the issue historically, biologically, legally, culturally (any way you wish) This blog can be called the legal option. Also, and no disrespect, but this is not the first time you have stated then you own a limited amount of knowledge of the law were as Anima has stated that he has study it, (I assume he might be a lawyer giving how he writes in legal terms) Yet, you say that he is in the wrong but you have not provided any legal rebuttal to him/her but just side remarks and yourself proclaim “I don’t agree. ” But why? In addition, if you cannot argue it legally then why replay? (Yes, I know you can do what you wish, but it just seems a little un- logical to enter a discussion that one does not know much about)
