How To Explain Gay Rights To An Idiot (free speech, women, city)

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by Fiyero

Ironically, none of you "traditional marriage" people would ever dream of returning to what the "cultural tradition of marriage actually is". You all really haven't the foggiest clue what marriage has been about in this nation. You are so blinded by the gender argument, that you ignore the other dozen plus changes marriage has gone through since the 17th Century.

Traditional in the sense of one man and one woman.

I'll tell you what, when two men want to marry, one must be called "she or Mrs.".

That would be better in my opinion.

How bad do you want it?

[subsound]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Traditional in the sense of one man and one woman.

I'll tell you what, when two men want to marry, one must be called "she or Mrs.".

That would be better in my opinion.

How bad do you want it?

I hope this is a joke. You are seriously against gay marriage because you don't know how to address the cards?

Do you tell people they shouldn't marry because the new last name has too many letters?

You don't need people to call your position idiotic, you are providing a great example of why already.

[hooligan]

Originally Posted by Roaddog

Are you? I think not but that has nothing to do with my opinion.

Again, your intent while committing and motivation for committing a crime absolutely should be taken into consideration.

[hooligan]

Originally Posted by Roaddog

You might want to go back and read where I said you have the right to your own opinionjust like I've always said.

This isn't about opinions, this is about LAWS.

[hooligan]

Originally Posted by alphamale

One judiciary's opinion.

The truth is the truth.

What the hell does "One judiciary's opinion" mean? Are you speaking of the Supreme Court's decision in Loving v. Virginia?

[Roaddog]

Originally Posted by hooligan

This isn't about opinions, this is about LAWS.

It's all about opinions, this is a forum you know.

[Roaddog]

Originally Posted by hooligan

Again, your intent while committing and motivation for committing a crime absolutely should be taken into consideration.

Why should it? did that change the outcome? When someone beats you up they don't hate you any more than they hate me. special laws are not needed and that is my Opinion.

[hooligan]

Originally Posted by Roaddog

Why should it?...

Because the law says it should?

You don't think a pre-planned, pre-meditated murder is worse than a heat-of-the-moment murder? I certainly do, despite the fact that in both cases the victim ended up dead.

[hooligan]

Originally Posted by Roaddog

It's all about opinions, this is a forum you know.

I meant the issue being discussed, not the discussion itself. I would have thought that was obvious.

[snofarmer]

Does a title define your relationship?
If so it’s not much of a relationship.