The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
FAQ    Search

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 453 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 23  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Thu January 16, 2014 7:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Posting (live)
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm
Posts: 18711
Lament wrote:
surfndestroy wrote:
I am sorry that you don't feel those in the poly community shouldn't have the same rights, responsibilities, and government support as those in the LBGTQ* and hetero communities have when it comes to marriage.


I have actually never said anything of this nature. I simply pointed out the sheer absurdity of your "equivalency." The irony of this is I probably know people who are legitimately members of the poly community than you do, but you're just trying to make an asinine point on a message board as opposed to actually knowing people who are affected by these issues. Not a single one of them would be dumb enough to try to make the equivalency claim you're making here between child rights and marriage rights. But then again you appear to be the equivalent of one of those teenagers who are really into LGBTQ rights because of Glee or some shit like that and view them as more about being an expression of "out there" as opposed to actually being someone concerned about the rights of actual people, aren't you?

Hey, I finally found an equivalency here that works!


:thumbsup:

_________________
RisingTides wrote:
There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Thu January 16, 2014 7:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Posting (live)
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:41 pm
Posts: 18711
surfndestroy wrote:
harmless wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
When can we expect to see polygamist same-sex marriages receiving the blessing of the state?


When can we expect to see your slippery slope?

I honestly can't see why anyone would be against marriage being open to multiple partners. If people can live as married with multiple partners then they should be able to avail themselves to the sames rights and responsibilties and status as those who choose to have just one partner. Women and men can both have children with multiple partners and they have all the same rights and responsibilities as parents who choose to have children with just a single partner. Marriage should be no different.


I am all for polygamy for those who choose it, but Lament is right when he says there is no equivalence between that and homosexuality. To say anything else is to play right into the hands of the fundamentalists with their slippery slope arguments. You can't just join any dots you like for whatever reason.

_________________
RisingTides wrote:
There is more kindness on the internet than we would care to admit to ourselves. Sometimes we are so afraid of falling victim to a ruse, we miss out on actual opportunities.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Thu January 16, 2014 10:04 pm 
Offline
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 3:41 am
Posts: 1199
harmless wrote:
simple schoolboy wrote:
When can we expect to see polygamist same-sex marriages receiving the blessing of the state?


When can we expect to see your slippery slope?

I didn't intend to imply it was a bad thing. It would be interesting to see the reaction of a typical Utah county clerk to such a marriage liscense, however.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Thu January 16, 2014 10:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
Posts: 29090
Location: Anywhere mediocrity is celebrated.
Why is marriage recognized by the state in the first place?

_________________
dev wrote:
Love pans out.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Thu January 16, 2014 10:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Commissioner
 Profile

Joined: Wed March 13, 2013 12:48 am
Posts: 14366
BurtReynolds wrote:
Why is marriage recognized by the state in the first place?


Burt is on the right track.

_________________
TEAM HARMLESS FOREVER...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 4:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 2:21 am
Posts: 1423
Lament wrote:
surfndestroy wrote:
I am sorry that you don't feel those in the poly community shouldn't have the same rights, responsibilities, and government support as those in the LBGTQ* and hetero communities have when it comes to marriage.


I have actually never said anything of this nature. I simply pointed out the sheer absurdity of your "equivalency." The irony of this is I probably know people who are legitimately members of the poly community than you do, but you're just trying to make an asinine point on a message board as opposed to actually knowing people who are affected by these issues. Not a single one of them would be dumb enough to try to make the equivalency claim you're making here between child rights and marriage rights. But then again you appear to be the equivalent of one of those teenagers who are really into LGBTQ rights because of Glee or some shit like that and view them as more about being an expression of "out there" as opposed to actually being someone concerned about the rights of actual people, aren't you?

Hey, I finally found an equivalency here that works!

I bet you know lots of coloured folks too! Do you still want them to have seperate water fountains?

You have yet to make a single arguement why a person should not be able to have multiples marriages concurrently even though they can have serially have multiple marriages. If a person can have kids with multiple partners and have a seperate set of rights and responsibilities to each child, why can't that happen between consenting adults? If consenting adults enter into this type of arrangement already (without government endorsement), why would you want to prevent them from having the rights to protect themselves? You have failed at every step to answer this but I guess that's cool because you know people in the poly community.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 5:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Site Admin
 Profile

Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm
Posts: 5341
As far as I can tell, Lament's argument limited to "equivalency" is analogous to "equal protection", a term in the US Constitution that could be very relevant depending on how SCOTUS ultimately rules on this case. If it limits its ruling solely to equal protection, then there is no implication of polygamous relationships on a basis of legal recognition. Saying that two people of the same sex can't marry would be a violation of equal protection, but would go no further with any two people given that right.

However, if the Court were to go down the Due Process route, and implicate (further?) that there is a fundamental right to marriage, then the argument that snd brings up could be important.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 5:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Commissioner
 Profile

Joined: Wed March 13, 2013 12:48 am
Posts: 14366
surfndestroy wrote:
You have yet to make a single arguement why a person should not be able to have multiples marriages concurrently even though they can have serially have multiple marriages.


BECAUSE ONCE AGAIN, I AM NOT ARGUING THAT A PERSON SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE MULTIPLE MARRIAGES CONCURRENTLY. I AM ARGUING THAT TRYING TO REASON IT'S THE SAME THING AS HAVING CHILDREN WITH MULTIPLE PARTNERS IS INCREDIBLY FUCKING STUPID.

A child exists. It is not an entity that was created to define a legal arrangement between adults. It is a living, breathing thing. It cannot be dissolved if it doesn't work out. There are a set of legal rights and responsibilities that extend from the child to whatever group of adults they extend to because they are for the well-being of the child. If you honestly cannot understand how this makes it a fundamentally different thing than marriage and NOT an equivalent situation, then perhaps a return to 4th grade is necessary.

But all by means, I await another response to things that I didn't actually say because you've proven completely incapable of responding to any of the points made against your silly reasoning. There are plenty of valid, intelligent arguments for the legalization of multiple marriages. It's a shame when people like you choose to speak for it in a way that is so shockingly lacking in reason and eloquence.

_________________
TEAM HARMLESS FOREVER...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 7:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The worst
 Profile

Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm
Posts: 29472
Lament wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:
Why is marriage recognized by the state in the first place?


Burt is on the right track.


There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections provided on the basis of marital status in Federal law.

http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/an-o ... ed-couples

_________________
*Led Zeppelin Mega Tournament: Click here*


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 7:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Commissioner
 Profile

Joined: Wed March 13, 2013 12:48 am
Posts: 14366
stip wrote:
There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections provided on the basis of marital status in Federal law.

http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/an-o ... ed-couples


If those 1,138 benefits/rights/protections were provided under a different name than "marriage," then recognition of marriage could be in the eye of the beholder and whatever they believe in, while the government could say "We recognize NO marriages; We issue rights/benefits/protections to people who file for an economic partnership, which we can define however we'd like since we invented it."

I'm not blaming them for not doing that, but honestly that seems to be the simplest solution to me (though, once again, it could never reasonably happen as we're way too far down the rabbit hole at this point. But yeah, I'd prefer a government that says "Marriage is like a confirmation/bar mitzvah/whatever religious rite of passage you believe in; It's irrelevant to us as a government," and then replaces it with something that more or less has all of the same legal benefits without using a name for it that is loaded with religious history and ideas of what "should" or "shouldn't" be. Hell, then you could make people re-file for it every five years.

_________________
TEAM HARMLESS FOREVER...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 7:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
Posts: 29090
Location: Anywhere mediocrity is celebrated.
Lament wrote:
stip wrote:
There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections provided on the basis of marital status in Federal law.

http://www.hrc.org/resources/entry/an-o ... ed-couples


If those 1,138 benefits/rights/protections were provided under a different name than "marriage," then recognition of marriage could be in the eye of the beholder and whatever they believe in, while the government could say "We recognize NO marriages; We issue rights/benefits/protections to people who file for an economic partnership, which we can define however we'd like since we invented it."

I'm not blaming them for not doing that, but honestly that seems to be the simplest solution to me (though, once again, it could never reasonably happen as we're way too far down the rabbit hole at this point. But yeah, I'd prefer a government that says "Marriage is like a confirmation/bar mitzvah/whatever religious rite of passage you believe in; It's irrelevant to us as a government," and then replaces it with something that more or less has all of the same legal benefits without using a name for it that is loaded with religious history and ideas of what "should" or "shouldn't" be. Hell, then you could make people re-file for it every five years.

yeah that.

_________________
dev wrote:
Love pans out.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 8:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar
The worst
 Profile

Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm
Posts: 29472
I agree, and I am personally in favor of just having civil unions legalized everywhere, and decoupling ALL legal rights from marriage. Having said that, since we do place so much cultural importance on the idea of marriage that legalizing it becomes important as a way of saying that our culture recognizes homosexuality as a legitimate choice, as opposed to a deviant behavior to be tolerated.

_________________
*Led Zeppelin Mega Tournament: Click here*


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 9:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar
post-structuralist
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:22 pm
Posts: 15051
Location: faked by jorge
I've been trying to read this thread, and I'm still confused over what lament and snd are arguing about :/

_________________
Dev wrote:
im such a nice guy and malice is total garbage.


Spoiler: show
people change. people stay the same. people are so often disappointing - random PM, person unnamed


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 9:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Commissioner
 Profile

Joined: Wed March 13, 2013 12:48 am
Posts: 14366
malice wrote:
I've been trying to read this thread, and I'm still confused over what lament and snd are arguing about :/



SND thinks that polygamous marriages are the same thing as people having kids with multiple partners. Instead of dealing with the fact that he's just flat out wrong, he keeps trying to turn it into me arguing against the idea of polygamous marriages, but he's running into problems because I've never actually argued against them, I've just pointed out how unbearably stupid his reasoning is.

A less intellectually challenged person (and the the most convincing polygamous marriage advocates I know) would argue that a good justification for legalizing polygamous marriage would be the fact that a person can start as many LLCs as with as many different people as they want. An LLC and a marriage are far more similar in nature than a child and a marriage, but I've realized over the past few pages that expecting SND to wrap his head around the concept is unreasonable, and he'll probably just keep responding to this made up idea that I'm fighting against polygamous marriage.

_________________
TEAM HARMLESS FOREVER...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Commissioner
 Profile

Joined: Wed March 13, 2013 12:48 am
Posts: 14366
stip wrote:
Having said that, since we do place so much cultural importance on the idea of marriage that legalizing it becomes important as a way of saying that our culture recognizes homosexuality as a legitimate choice, as opposed to a deviant behavior to be tolerated.


Very well put. And I agree with this wholeheartedly.

_________________
TEAM HARMLESS FOREVER...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 10:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
post-structuralist
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:22 pm
Posts: 15051
Location: faked by jorge
Lament wrote:
malice wrote:
I've been trying to read this thread, and I'm still confused over what lament and snd are arguing about :/



SND thinks that polygamous marriages are the same thing as people having kids with multiple partners. Instead of dealing with the fact that he's just flat out wrong, he keeps trying to turn it into me arguing against the idea of polygamous marriages, but he's running into problems because I've never actually argued against them, I've just pointed out how unbearably stupid his reasoning is.

A less intellectually challenged person (and the the most convincing polygamous marriage advocates I know) would argue that a good justification for legalizing polygamous marriage would be the fact that a person can start as many LLCs as with as many different people as they want. An LLC and a marriage are far more similar in nature than a child and a marriage, but I've realized over the past few pages that expecting SND to wrap his head around the concept is unreasonable, and he'll probably just keep responding to this made up idea that I'm fighting against polygamous marriage.

oh.

_________________
Dev wrote:
im such a nice guy and malice is total garbage.


Spoiler: show
people change. people stay the same. people are so often disappointing - random PM, person unnamed


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 10:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar
post-structuralist
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:22 pm
Posts: 15051
Location: faked by jorge
I better go back and read the thread again

_________________
Dev wrote:
im such a nice guy and malice is total garbage.


Spoiler: show
people change. people stay the same. people are so often disappointing - random PM, person unnamed


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 10:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm
Posts: 29090
Location: Anywhere mediocrity is celebrated.
malice wrote:
I better go back and read the thread again

Is that really the best use of your time/?

_________________
dev wrote:
Love pans out.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 10:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Commissioner
 Profile

Joined: Wed March 13, 2013 12:48 am
Posts: 14366
malice wrote:
I better go back and read the thread again


Or...

You can dance with me. To some Jesus Jones.

Image

_________________
TEAM HARMLESS FOREVER...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Same-Sex Marriage
PostPosted: Fri January 17, 2014 10:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar
post-structuralist
 Profile

Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:22 pm
Posts: 15051
Location: faked by jorge
I'm the girl in the background with the jumper and the hair barrette

_________________
Dev wrote:
im such a nice guy and malice is total garbage.


Spoiler: show
people change. people stay the same. people are so often disappointing - random PM, person unnamed


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 453 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 23  Next

Board index » Word on the Street » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 4/5, Citizen Dick and 3 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

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Fri December 15, 2017 12:47 am