Ohio Senate Approves Gay-Marriage Ban

[Ben Kenobi]

Marriage affects everyone, therefore the people should have a say as to what marriage means.

Why should the people of Ohio have to marry homosexuals if they don't want to? Why don't you leave them alone?

Yep, that describes your efforts to defend your bigotry to a "t." Not long and you'll round out the "r" and "y" too.

My point is that just because other people do bad things, it does not mean you need to help them out.

Please continue to call me a bigot. It really strengthens your argument.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Marriage affects everyone, therefore the people should have a say as to what marriage means.

How does my marrying my BF affect you?

Why don't you leave them alone?

Good question -- why don't you leave them alone when try to marry?

[DRoseDARs]

So homosexuals are not considered as part of "the people of Ohio?" Are they likewise not considered as part of the people of Canada? Of the United States?

Are homosexuals not considered part of the Human species and therefore not worthy of equal status and equal access to rights and privledges afforded to "the people of Ohio?"



"Why don't you just leave them alone?"
Jeez, the irony in that statement...

[Ben Kenobi]

How does my marrying my BF affect you?

You change what marriage means for everyone who gets married. Ohio likes to keep marriage as it is, as between one man and one woman. Why should they change to accomodate you?

why don't you leave them alone when try to marry?

It's not I, who is the limiter, but the Ohio legislature. They believe that affirming marriage as one man and one woman is in the interests of the state.

[Napoleon I]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Marriage affects everyone, therefore the people should have a say as to what marriage means.

Why should the people of Ohio have to marry homosexuals if they don't want to? Why don't you leave them alone?

Why should the people of Ohio have to marry heterosexuals? Nobody has to marry anybody - it should be a choice available to everyone, and government shouldn't meddle in it by setting laws that forbid certain types of marriage.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
You change what marriage means for everyone who gets married. Ohio likes to keep marriage as it is, as between one man and one woman. Why should they change to accomodate you?

Oh, nonsense. The couples who married before haven't changed their reasons, their love is not changed, and they are not affected.

It is an entirely bogus and unsubstantiated argument that allowing two people of the same gender to marry somehow invalidates a straight couple's marriage.

The only time this would occur is if they married because they knew gays couldn't marry -- which would be what the people of "Xodus" surely do, since they're gays-under-the-guise-of-straights...

It's not I, who is the limiter, but the Ohio legislature. They believe that affirming marriage as one man and one woman is in the interests of the state.

This is also your opinion, what is the point of this useless paragraph you've contributed?

[Ben Kenobi]

Nobody has to marry anybody - it should be a choice available to everyone, and government shouldn't meddle in it by setting laws that forbid certain types of marriage.

So you would agree with polygamy, with incest? How about child marriages?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So you would agree with polygamy, with incest? How about child marriages?

I have no problem with polygamy being legalized, as long as it's all consentual.

Incest has biological implications for the offspring, and is a health issue -- not a religious or moral issue.

Children do not have a sufficiently developed mind to be capable of deciding who they want to marry.

1-0, Asher.

[Ben Kenobi]

Children do not have a sufficiently developed mind to be capable of deciding who they want to marry.

But this requires state intervention, Asher.

Incest has biological implications for the offspring, and is a health issue -- not a religious or moral issue.

As does this. If you require incest to be banned because of health reasons, you are not permitting all kinds of marriage.

Secondly, the question was not directed to you. Let Napoleon answer for himself, or would you rather answer for Napoleon?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
But this requires state intervention, Asher.

It does. Of course. State intervention is required in cases such as this.

Secondly, the question was not directed to you. Let Napoleon answer for himself, or would you rather answer for Napoleon?

I realize it wasn't directed at me, and I'm not answering for Napoleon, but I merely thought it was required for somebody to address the "polygamy" argument that Christians always throw into these debates as part of the slippery-slope nonsense.

[Ben Kenobi]

The couples who married before haven't changed their reasons, their love is not changed,

Asher:

So marriage is all about love? If I love my grandmother, I ought to be allowed to marry her?

This is also your opinion,

Ask them. I do not presume to speak for the Ohio legislature.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Asher:

So marriage is all about love? If I love my grandmother, I ought to be allowed to marry her?

Strawman: Where did I ever say marriages are all about love?

The point is, the very notion that people's marriages are invalidated the second homosexual couples marry is laughable, unless those people married on the basis that homosexuals cannot marry.

Argue that, please.

[Ben Kenobi]

address the "polygamy" argument that Christians always throw into these debates as part of the slippery-slope nonsense.

I suggest you refrain from answering other's questions in the future. It's a sign of respect for the other poster.

[Napoleon I]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


So you would agree with polygamy, with incest? How about child marriages?

Polygamy - as long as it includes polyandry as well as polygyny and as long as there is no exploitation or coersion going on (tough set of conditions - no known society comes even close).

Incest has nothing to do with marriage - that's a sexual act.

Child marriages - whenever those children become reasoning adults and can make informed decisions.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I suggest you refrain from answering other's questions in the future. It's a sign of respect for the other poster.

Thanks for the advice, Ace. It means a lot coming from you.

I wasn't answering the question for him. If you meant for him and only him to address it, why don't you PM it to him.

Must I define "public forum" for you?