When did you go royal on me? Or Crown Royal, whatever. I actually spoke directly to that and did in the thread concerning it in short order.Let's see. During this terribly boring interchange with Town Heretic, we haven't found out his stance on the "bathroom bills" (I assumed that he would be against grown men using the same restroom as women and little girls, but silly me, that's what happens when I assume).
Also, you're just flat out lying:
No...In fact, I've had problems with the restroom business and been against the idea here and elsewhere, for a number of actual reasons that don't have anything to do with name calling.
No he didn't. Not even once. He did write, "a lot of the hue and cry over "traditional marriage" was little more than a repackaging of a religious argument to make it look like something else."He's told us that marriage is a "religious notion
What I've consistently held on the point of marriage is that as it's set out in relation to the state religion doesn't enter into it. Atheists marry every year.
The moment you put "proper" into the question you might as well as, "What do you believe the role of government should be?"What is the proper* role of civil government?
Right, regarded, which is a subjective valuation. Now if you want a subjective evaluation you shouldn't then try to turn it into a multiple choice with two wrong answers.Proper:
1.truly what something is said or regarded to be; genuine
You'd be a lot more convincing in trying to frame my philosophical approach if you got any particular thing I wrote correctly when ham-fistedly attempting to sum it. lain:If you would like to defend your secular humanist stance on these issues
If you don't like what I'm saying stop talking to me. You've invited me here on more than one occasion. You made sure you got my attention. If you don't like where that goes it's on you. Stop misrepresenting me and stop engaging me. I'll be happy to go back to not paying any attention to whatever it is you're really doing here.
Last edited: