[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by Bosco55David

First off, what is your fascination with insinuating people are gay because they support gay rights? You've done this at least twice now. Is it your way of somehow validating your personal views by creating a false reality where no straight people have opposing views? Whatever it is, I bet a psychologist would have fun with that one.

No insinuation. I'm sorry if I have incorrectly identified you as a gay man. I honestly thought you were. I have a hard time remembering who is what on this board. It's just not something I really care about. It seems that there are several that are gay that argue for gay marriage on here.

Second, your example is no more valid than it was 20 minutes ago. Allowing gays to partake in legally recognized marriages doesn't associate your marriage to gay marriages anymore than being a licensed driver associates you to drunk drivers.

I've never felt the need to have a ceremony to declare someone a "driver". It's not something society typically makes a bit to do over. I suppose if we placed a higher social standard on the institution of driving it would be an issue.

There is simply no logical connection between the two ideas except that which you've created in your own mind. This is why you STILL cannot give a straight answer to my question.

And lastly, you might as well drop the pedophile argument. It was a patently retarded analogy that has further weakened and already weak stance.

You don't like being associated with pedophilia? You don't think gay people like that?

I don't like my marriage being compared to the immoral relationship of 2 men.

[McBain II]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

I've never felt the need to have a ceremony to declare someone a "driver". It's not something society typically makes a bit to do over. I suppose if we placed a higher social standard on the institution of driving it would be an issue.

Social value is completely irrelevant to the discussion. My point stands.

You don't like being associated with pedophilia? You don't think gay people like that?

Which is, for the second time now, an association which never really existed. The bigots created the perception of an association, much like they did with blacks and other minorities on other issues, but our evolving society has thoroughly crushed that association to the point where the only ones who really hold that view are the bigots themselves, but that is besides the point.

Holding onto this retarded argument is making you look even worse in this debate. No sane, logical person is going to give credence to the argument that incorrectly applying a definition of a very negative word to a group of people who don't meet the criteria is somehow related to changing the definition of a very positive word to include a group of people who want to be included. The two arguments are incompatible.

I don't like my marriage being compared to the immoral relationship of 2 men.

But how is it being compared? You and your wife's marriage will still be between two heterosexuals of the opposite sex. That will not change as far as I can see.

And while you are free to hold that opinion...as unfounded as it may be...you also need to understand and accept that such an opinion will never be considered valid for the purposes of policy making.

[JustMe_T3K]

Yeah they need to change Nebraska's laws.

Homosexuals have to go to Iowa to get married
and
1st cousins have to go to South Dakota to get married

ITS NOT FAIR !!!!!!!

AND they need to reverse the smoking ban.

I should be able to smoke in my own business if I want. Those that don't like smoke can choose not to work for me or come into my business.

ITS NOT FAIR !!!!!!

[DentalFloss]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

Pretty typical. When faced with something you can't answer you just respond with "well...you're stupid!!!!"

He's right, it's a stupid analogy. A rose by any other name is still a rose. You can put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. If you start using the word 'pedophile' as a substitute for 'gay', it doesn't change the underlying definition of 'gay' nor 'pedophile' as they're currently used.

Language changes over time. 'Gay' used to mean happy, somehow over time it's come to mean 'homosexual'. I suppose it's not impossible that 'pedophile' could, over time, come to mean 'gay'.

But it's a stupid, meaningless analogy.

Calling what my wife and I have equal to that which 2 men or 2 women can share in is in my mind a very negative thing.

Ahhhh, the root of the matter. You view your relationship as superior to a homosexual one. Why didn't you just say so a long time ago and save us all the trouble.

You are wrong, of course, any loving adult relationship is just as important as any other, but at least we get a glimmer of truth out of you.

Finally.

[Raphael07]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

No insinuation. I'm sorry if I have incorrectly identified you as a gay man. I honestly thought you were. I have a hard time remembering who is what on this board. It's just not something I really care about. It seems that there are several that are gay that argue for gay marriage on here.

Actually, there aren't. I typically don't get involved in these arguments just because it causes undo stress. I simply observe. On occasion. Then there is Surf who is sporadic at best and who I prefer to ignore because I disagree with his methods. There used to be two others but they haven't been active in years. So, basically it's just Surf that you're going against.

[SurfOmaha]

Originally Posted by Raphael07

Actually, there aren't. I typically don't get involved in these arguments just because it causes undo stress. I simply observe. On occasion. Then there is Surf who is sporadic at best and who I prefer to ignore because I disagree with his methods. There used to be two others but they haven't been active in years. So, basically it's just Surf that you're going against.

How is he going against me? I've only posted in this thread for the first only a few days ago. You guys seem to have done a wonderful job of keeping this thread going on without me. And I'm proud. Of course those who hate gays deserve the most thanks for the gay themed threads to suddenly dominate the Nebraska and Omaha forums in the last couple of years. They just can't seem to get away from them. With these gay themed threads among the most replied, I'd have to say its a sight for sore eyes, and not a moment to soon either. Why is it always my fault, Raphael07? Free speech is free speech, even if it does involve our very own LGBT issues.

[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by DentalFloss

He's right, it's a stupid analogy. A rose by any other name is still a rose. You can put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. If you start using the word 'pedophile' as a substitute for 'gay', it doesn't change the underlying definition of 'gay' nor 'pedophile' as they're currently used.

Language changes over time. 'Gay' used to mean happy, somehow over time it's come to mean 'homosexual'. I suppose it's not impossible that 'pedophile' could, over time, come to mean 'gay'.

But it's a stupid, meaningless analogy.



Ahhhh, the root of the matter. You view your relationship as superior to a homosexual one. Why didn't you just say so a long time ago and save us all the trouble.

Of course I do. In the same way that gay people bristle at the thought of being compared to pedophiles.

[DentalFloss]

Originally Posted by Calvinist

Of course I do. In the same way that gay people bristle at the thought of being compared to pedophiles.

I'm starting to understand.

Naturally since pedophiles are vile and evil people, gay people take umbrage with the idea that they would be associated with that, or worse, outright equavalized with it simply for being gay.

In the same vein, you must believe that gay people themselves are vile and evil, for you see yourself as superior to them, and by society 'giving' them the right to marriage, it's the same as comparing those inferior people to your superiorness.

I'm seeing the light.

[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by DentalFloss

I'm starting to understand.

Naturally since pedophiles are vile and evil people, gay people take umbrage with the idea that they would be associated with that, or worse, outright equavalized with it simply for being gay.

In the same vein, you must believe that gay people themselves are vile and evil, for you see yourself as superior to them, and by society 'giving' them the right to marriage, it's the same as comparing those inferior people to your superiorness.

I'm seeing the light.

You've almost got it. I would not suggest that a gay person is vile or evil simply by existing. I have had gay friends in the past that I got along with just fine. But their relationships are not equivalent to hetero marriage. I'm sorry...that's just the way it is.

[HandBanana]

I think Ive got this one pretty well figured out.