The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Sat Nov 23, 2024 9:46 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:50 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:


A gay man (or woman) cannot legally get married to the person that they choose as their spouse in the same way a straight couple can.




Bzzzz wrong...like I said...get back to me when you figure it out.


Yeah, I understand your argument. I do. I really do.

Its just that you're arguing against something completely different.

On the basis of teh gay. Cause you fear it or something. I dunno why really.

You're arguing X, I'm arguing Y. The arguments don't coincide except for the fact that they're both about marriage.


You are now making **** up.

Why on earth would I fear gays? That makes zero sense. I've stated many, many times I don't care what you do with your life. Live it however you want. I do, however, not have to agree with it, like it, support it...whatever. Shoot, you can even be an overweight guy who lives in his moms basement if that's what you want to do with your life. Knock yourself out!

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Last edited by Nitefox on Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:53 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Lenas wrote:
Marriage debate again is boring.

NF:
Lenas wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
Military conflicts are covered. Even then it doesn't mean I agree with every one we get into.


So, do you only disagree with the abortion part of Planned Parenthood?




If it's a private business, do what you want. If you can make a buck killiing babies, why do you need my money?

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:54 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Müs wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
NephyrS wrote:


Personally, I don't think there should be tax breaks for getting married or having kids, but that's just me. I'd prefer we get rid of marriage entirely as a legal construct, and grant "civil unions" all the current legal standing that "marriages" have.



I'd be just fine with this.


So why aren't you fine with gay marriage?


I assume it's for the same reasons that many homosexuals aren't fine with "civil unions" or any other name except marriage.


To be fair, many "civil unions" are just "separate but equal" in that they're certainly separate... but far from equal.


That's a red herring. If there were no difference between "civil marriage" and "civil union" there would still be those crying inequality because of public perception if nothing else.

Müs wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Müs wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Then you answered your own question.


I haven't had enough coffee to follow this non sequitur properly.

I've answered my question by explaining that its about the state rather than religion?

I thought I was responding to Fox's strawman army.

No, it's not a non sequitur.

You asked, "Why would X and Y want to get married?".

Then you answered that, "Its about the few hundred family rights and protections that come along with "marriage".

i.e. You answered your own question.

While I'd argue that you aren't speaking about rights, but State sanctioned privileges that should be done away with as many turn into punitive measures against single people, any two people wishing to have the State sanction their relationship should be able to do so for any reason.


Fair enough.

But, since *married people* are loath to give up those rights and privileges then we need to expand the definition of "marriage" to be more inclusive rather than excluding those that are differently oriented.

If the definition of "civil unions" applied to all "marriages" equally no matter the orientation of those involved and "marriage" was strictly a non-recognized religious thing... that'd probably be best.

Since the likelihood of *that* happening approaches zero... one tends to work for the things that are actually feasible.


As I said: "...any two people wishing to have the State sanction their relationship should be able to do so for any reason."

Call it what you will, it's a freaking contract, and any two, six or forty people should be able to sign it.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:56 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Nitefox wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:


A gay man (or woman) cannot legally get married to the person that they choose as their spouse in the same way a straight couple can.




Bzzzz wrong...like I said...get back to me when you figure it out.


Yeah, I understand your argument. I do. I really do.

Its just that you're arguing against something completely different.

On the basis of teh gay. Cause you fear it or something. I dunno why really.

You're arguing X, I'm arguing Y. The arguments don't coincide except for the fact that they're both about marriage.


You are now making **** up.

Why on earth would I fear gays? That makes zero sense. I've stated many, many times I don't care what you do with your life. Live it however you want. I do, however, not have to agree with it, like it, support it...whatever. Shoot, you can even be an overweight guy who lives in his moms basement if that's what you want to do with your life. Knock yourself out!


So if you don't care, why do you continue to support the arguments against gay marriage?

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:56 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Lenas wrote:
Marriage debate again is boring.

NF:
Lenas wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
Military conflicts are covered. Even then it doesn't mean I agree with every one we get into.


So, do you only disagree with the abortion part of Planned Parenthood?


I'm not NF, but I disagree with any private organization receiving my money through the Gov't, for any reason.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:57 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Vindicarre wrote:

As I said: "...any two people wishing to have the State sanction their relationship should be able to do so for any reason."

Call it what you will, it's a freaking contract, and any two, six or forty people should be able to sign it.


So now we're arguing just to argue? Our positions on this substantially concur.

Except for the "marriage" term. I think.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:12 pm
Posts: 2366
Location: Mook's Pimp Skittle Stable
Vindicarre wrote:
Lenas wrote:
Marriage debate again is boring.

NF:
Lenas wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
Military conflicts are covered. Even then it doesn't mean I agree with every one we get into.


So, do you only disagree with the abortion part of Planned Parenthood?


I'm not NF, but I disagree with any private organization receiving my money through the Gov't, for any reason.


Just to be clear, because I'm curious, does this also extend to any companies receiving subsidies or tax cuts from the government?

Government research grants?

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:00 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Subsidies? You bet.
Tax Cuts? Uh huh.
Grants? Yup.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:05 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:


A gay man (or woman) cannot legally get married to the person that they choose as their spouse in the same way a straight couple can.




Bzzzz wrong...like I said...get back to me when you figure it out.


Yeah, I understand your argument. I do. I really do.

Its just that you're arguing against something completely different.

On the basis of teh gay. Cause you fear it or something. I dunno why really.

You're arguing X, I'm arguing Y. The arguments don't coincide except for the fact that they're both about marriage.


You are now making **** up.

Why on earth would I fear gays? That makes zero sense. I've stated many, many times I don't care what you do with your life. Live it however you want. I do, however, not have to agree with it, like it, support it...whatever. Shoot, you can even be an overweight guy who lives in his moms basement if that's what you want to do with your life. Knock yourself out!


So if you don't care, why do you continue to support the arguments against gay marriage?



That falls under the "do not have to agree, like, support" part. I am not perfect. I try to live my life by certain guidlines that you like to poke fun of and mock for various reasons. What people do with their lives, is their choice. I'll give you that. I may not like it, but I'll treat you with respect even if I don't care for it. But if it goes against what I believe is right, moral, whatever...then sorry...you don't get my support.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:11 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Nitefox wrote:
That falls under the "do not have to agree, like, support" part. I am not perfect. I try to live my life by certain guidlines that you like to poke fun of and mock for various reasons. What people do with their lives, is their choice. I'll give you that. I may not like it, but I'll treat you with respect even if I don't care for it. But if it goes against what I believe is right, moral, whatever...then sorry...you don't get my support.


There's a difference between not supporting something and actively denying it to others because something you live by tells you to. Even if that thing you live by isn't shared with those you're trying to deny things to.

Just so you know, that's kinda shitty.

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:13 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Is he really "actively denying" anything to anyone, or just stating his opinion? If he's not part of the "solution", is he part of the "problem"? If he's not with us, is he against us? If he doesn't support gay marriage, do the terrorists win? (Sorry, the other thread crept in here, but the first two questions are legit).

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Last edited by Vindicarre on Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:14 pm 
Offline
Web Ninja
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:32 pm
Posts: 8248
Location: The Tunt Mansion
Nitefox wrote:
If it's a private business, do what you want. If you can make a buck killiing babies, why do you need my money?


So... don't wanna answer my actual question?

Is abortion the only part of Planned Parenthood's services that you have an issue with?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:14 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Müs wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
That falls under the "do not have to agree, like, support" part. I am not perfect. I try to live my life by certain guidlines that you like to poke fun of and mock for various reasons. What people do with their lives, is their choice. I'll give you that. I may not like it, but I'll treat you with respect even if I don't care for it. But if it goes against what I believe is right, moral, whatever...then sorry...you don't get my support.


There's a difference between not supporting something and actively denying it to others because something you live by tells you to. Even if that thing you live by isn't shared with those you're trying to deny things to.

Just so you know, that's kinda shitty.



I'll edit this as we aren't getting anywhere fast.

You believe what you want, I'll believe what I want.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Last edited by Nitefox on Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:12 pm
Posts: 2366
Location: Mook's Pimp Skittle Stable
Vindicarre wrote:
Subsidies? You bet.
Tax Cuts? Uh huh.
Grants? Yup.


Also just curious, does your definition of private organizations extend to academic institutions? Or non-profit research institutions, like Scripps or MIT Media Labs?

And I'm assuming from your above statement that you're against churches being able to operate in a tax-exempt state?

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:25 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
NephyrS wrote:
Vindicarre wrote:
Subsidies? You bet.
Tax Cuts? Uh huh.
Grants? Yup.


Also just curious, does your definition of private organizations extend to academic institutions? Or non-profit research institutions, like Scripps or MIT Media Labs?


It's not "my definition". Are they private organizations? If yes, then why should the Gov't give our money to private organizations they approve of and not others?

NephyrS wrote:
And I'm assuming from your above statement that you're against churches being able to operate in a tax-exempt state?


Absolutely.
Out of curiosity, what should the Gov't be taxing them on?

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:12 pm
Posts: 2366
Location: Mook's Pimp Skittle Stable
The same thing any other company with income is taxed on?

And I asked about private organizations, because I've heard different people consider different institutions "private", depending on how much of a split there is in the way they're run. Technically, state schools are "government run", but practically they run as private organizations.

And I'd argue that the Gov't gives money to private non-profit research institutions in a fashion that grows infrastructure and benefits us all, but I know there are differences of opinion on the issue. We'd definitely be looking at a massive drop in progress if we stopped government research grants.

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:22 pm
Posts: 5716
Nobody's proposing to ban birth control. I think they are proposing to not pay for your birth control.

So, buy me a life jacket or I might drown!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:43 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Lenas wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
If it's a private business, do what you want. If you can make a buck killiing babies, why do you need my money?


So... don't wanna answer my actual question?

Is abortion the only part of Planned Parenthood's services that you have an issue with?



Obviously, why is that important? If your next question is "So you would be ok if the PP continued getting goverment money if they stopped doing abortions?" then the answer would be no.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 4:39 am
Posts: 452
Nitefox wrote:
You're not that bright are you?


Answer these questions for me in a yes or no fashion ok? Humor me.


Can Bob who is gay and Steve who is gay get married to each other?
Can Rick who is not gay and Joe who is not gay get married to each other?
Can Bob who is gay and Joe who is not gay get married to each other?

Can Bob who is gay and Linda who is gay get married to each other?
Can Rick who is not gay and Lisa who is not gay get married to each other?
Can Sally who is gay and Joe who is not gay get married to each other?


Eh, it simply amounts to gender discrimination.

Can Susan marry Bob? Yes
Can Richard marry Bob? No.

Why? Because Richard is a male. Males are being discriminated against because all females are allowed to marry Bob no problem, but any male who wants to marry Bob cannot solely because of their gender.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:12 pm
Posts: 2366
Location: Mook's Pimp Skittle Stable
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
Nobody's proposing to ban birth control. I think they are proposing to not pay for your birth control.

So, buy me a life jacket or I might drown!


See my education metaphors a few pages back.

We shouldn't teach kids how to use condoms(seat belts) in sex education (drivers education) because it leads to riskier behavior!

We shouldn't teach our children how to use condoms (lifejackets) when they have sex (go boating), because it will lead to riskier behavior!

Nitpick it if you will, but the metaphor is definitely there, and the comparison is pretty funny.

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:03 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
FarSky wrote:
Of all the girls I've known who take birth control, only a very, very small percentage take it for teh sexxorz. Generally, condoms suffice for that. They take it for its myriad other uses as hormone regulation in order to do things like, say, function as a normal human being without being confined to a bed writhing in agony for three or more days, missing school and work because the pain is so great.


The vast majority of women take it for sexual reasons. However, a great many of those women also take it for other purposes, some of which have alternate means of treatment. Acne is a good example. Birth control can be used to treat acne, but its far from the only method.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:07 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
NephyrS wrote:

Paying money =/= a distinct chance of death or serious medical complications.


Not all, or even most, women who have abortions face either problem.

More importantly, paying money for 18+ years =/= "control of reproductive health" that lasts for 9 months or so. The problem with the present argument isn't that there shouldn't be some freedom of choice in abortion, it's that women should not be able to exercise complete control over their reproductive future AND a mans in this fashion. It isn't as if child support is some minor bill to pay, it's a major financial burden that can make supporting himself, or his other children very hard for a man. It can be that way for women too, but let's not pretend men can easily get custody or get women to pay child support. It's vastly skewed.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:09 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Diamondeye wrote:
It isn't as if child support is some minor bill to pay, it's a major financial burden that can make supporting himself, or his other children very hard for a man. It can be that way for women too, but let's not pretend men can easily get custody or get women to pay child support. It's vastly skewed.



*Nods like crazy*

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:10 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
NephyrS wrote:
Some posters here continually amaze me.

I think that Christian teachings involve compassion, helping those less fortunate, etc.


Yes, they do. Using the government to tax people and provide specific social programs, however, has nothing to do with compassion. Compassion is exemplified by your own willful giving, not by making laws to force everyone to give, nor by advancing specific social agendas because they ostensibly "help the less fortunate".

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 3:19 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Amanar wrote:
Nitefox wrote:
You're not that bright are you?


Answer these questions for me in a yes or no fashion ok? Humor me.


Can Bob who is gay and Steve who is gay get married to each other?
Can Rick who is not gay and Joe who is not gay get married to each other?
Can Bob who is gay and Joe who is not gay get married to each other?

Can Bob who is gay and Linda who is gay get married to each other?
Can Rick who is not gay and Lisa who is not gay get married to each other?
Can Sally who is gay and Joe who is not gay get married to each other?


Eh, it simply amounts to gender discrimination.

Can Susan marry Bob? Yes
Can Richard marry Bob? No.

Why? Because Richard is a male. Males are being discriminated against because all females are allowed to marry Bob no problem, but any male who wants to marry Bob cannot solely because of their gender.


That's silly. The same situation applies to females. They cannot marry persons of the same gender either. Therefore, there is no gender discrimination - unless you're going to try to say "everyone's being discriminated against equally!"

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 131 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 209 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group