Oregon Judge Refuses To Perform Same-Sex Marriages

[ok doser]

Did he say that?

he's making the argument that foolish liberals make - that what consenting adults do in private is nobody's business but their own

I was using prostitution and adultery as examples of where that argument collapses

Do you ask because you are in favor of legalizing these things?

of course not

 

[Sherman]

the point that you missed, being, that queetzal's refrain of "but I can't help who I'm attracted to!" is without value

I can't help being attracted to 68 Camaros, but that doesn't mean I have to marry them

:up:
Sadly a few folks missed the whole point of your exchange with Quetzal. The original post was just a ludicrous as the parody.

 

[chrysostom]

relax
this is just the shouting
it is all over but the shouting
get use to it

 

[Sherman]

Did he say that?
Do you ask because you are in favor of legalizing these things?

His posting style is called parody. It is used to show the weakness in an argument. There have been a couple of users that have used parody in debate. I have no issue with parody as long as it is not used to attack members families.

 

[Lexington'96]

Marriage has always been known as a union between a husband and a wife.

The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal rights to all citizens regardless of their race. This means that laws restricting marriage to people of the same race are unconstitutional. Marriage can be a husband and wife of the same race, a white husband and a black wife, a black husband and an Asian wife, or any other combination. Interracial marriage is in the Bible, Moses' wife was black and God condoned the marriage.

However, a man can't be a wife and a woman can't be a husband. And thus same-sex "marriage" is something that does not exist.

 

[Jose Fly]

Marriage has always been known as a union between a husband and a wife.

No it hasn't. For example, it has historically been a union between a husband and many wives, or in some cultures a union between a wife and many husbands.

The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees equal rights to all citizens regardless of their race. This means that laws restricting marriage to people of the same race are unconstitutional.

The Constitution also guarantees all citizens liberty and equal protection under the law. This means that laws banning same sex marriage are unconstitutional.

Interracial marriage is in the Bible

So is polygamy.

However, a man can't be a wife and a woman can't be a husband. And thus same-sex "marriage" is something that does not exist.

Yet it does. Huh. :think:

 

[Lexington'96]

No it hasn't. For example, it has historically been a union between a husband and many wives, or in some cultures a union between a wife and many husbands.

But it's always been between opposite gender.

The Constitution also guarantees all citizens liberty and equal protection under the law. This means that laws banning same sex marriage are unconstitutional.

Everyone has the right to marry someone of the opposite gender.

So is polygamy.

But God didn't condone it. God explicitly condoned Moses' marriage.

 

[Jose Fly]

But it's always been between opposite gender.

Not anymore.

Everyone has the right to marry someone of the opposite gender.

And now everyone has the right to marry someone of the same gender.

But God didn't condone it. God explicitly condoned Moses' marriage.

That only matters if you believe the Bible.

 

[Lexington'96]

Not anymore.

In only a handful of countries the definition has changed.

And now everyone has the right to marry someone of the same gender.

So no one was being discriminated against either way.

 

[Jose Fly]

In only a handful of countries the definition has changed.

It's about two dozen, and more are being added.

So no one was being discriminated against either way.

Not anymore.

 

[ok doser]

And now everyone has the right to marry someone of the same gender.

but that's a "right" I'll never use

is it fair that a new "right" has been discovered that 98% of the country can't use?

 

[Jose Fly]

but that's a "right" I'll never use

So?

is it fair that a new "right" has been discovered that 98% of the country can't use?

You don't expect to ever use the right to liberty and equal protection under the law?

 

[ok doser]

So?



You don't expect to ever use the right to liberty and equal protection under the law?

homos already had that with marriage laws as they were written for hundreds of years


they had the liberty and equal protection under the law to marry someone of the opposite sex

 

[Jose Fly]

homos already had that with marriage laws as they were written for hundreds of years


they had the liberty and equal protection under the law to marry someone of the opposite sex

And now they have the liberty and equal protection under the law to marry someone of the same sex.

 

[ok doser]

so if i choose, to, I can get married by the state to as many men and women as I want?

neato!

 

[Jose Fly]

so if i choose, to, I can get married by the state to as many men and women as I want?

neato!

Have fun.

Fundamentalists.....:chuckle:

 

[Angel4Truth]

I can choose if I want to kill someone. I can choose to cheat on my wife. I can choose to kidnap the next door neighbor. I cannot choose the sex of a person that I am attracted to. Whatever excuse you use to ostracize and demonize people is up to you. Just don't expect everyone to support you.

You cannot choose if you are attracted to your married neighbor, does that mean adultery is ok?

Are we demonizing adulterers when we say its wrong?

Attraction doesn't make something OK. That is when self control needs to be practiced.

The real point I was trying to make is that each of those things are different from the next. Many on this forum want to box everything up to make their lazy argument easier. Truth is, not all actions are morally equal and each action has it's own set of circumstances as well as it's own set of legal standards. Instead of lumping homosexuality and pedophilia together, I only wish to address that there are significant differences.

Not that any of this matters because you are simply going to dismiss it on the grounds that it goes against what you were raised to believe.

You missed my post.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Can't wait for the day when you folks are fighting for the right of a Muslim judge to not marry a Christian couple. :up:

A Christian couple walk into a mosque and ask the mullah to marry them.

It has the makings of a tv mini-series (rated "R" for extreme violence).

 

[bybee]

he's making the argument that foolish liberals make - that what consenting adults do in private is nobody's business but their own

I was using prostitution and adultery as examples of where that argument collapses



of course not

I see.