Originally posted by gribbler
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Republicans really do hate gay people
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by MrFun View PostNo, gay people are not free to marry to marry one another.
Under the hypothetical, a gay man marrying another gay man is not prohibited by the state, it is physically impossible unless one of them gets a sex change.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MrFun View PostI understand what he is saying, HC. That's why I argued that it does not make sense, in my reply to him above. Take two gay men who are attracted to one another, and are in love with one another, so they want to marry one another. But they are denied the right to marry, because they cannot marry one another.
Kuci's so-called "reasoning" denies gay people the right to marry one another, because in the Western world, people tend to marry one another out of mutual romantic love. Saying that a gay man is free to marry a woman denies the gay man the freedom to marry the gay man he is in love with.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View PostMy god. I want to know if you're being deliberately obtuse or you simply aren't smart enough to understand what Kuci is saying.
In the hypothetical Kuci is postulating, gay people marrying each other is as sensible as male pregnancy. It doesn't even exist. So gay people are as free to marry (i.e. MARRY WOMEN) as everyone else.
Comment
-
Originally posted by kentonio View PostThis is exactly why you and Kuci miss the ball so often in debates, you base your positions on these hypotheticals that are meaningless in terms of real life.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kuciwalker View PostNo, they aren't. A huge proportion of the population believes the hypothetical is true. If you are unable to put yourself in your opponents' shoes and reason from their own premises, you are intellectually stunted and should have little faith in your own beliefs.
Then again it doesn't really matter what proportion are for or against, just like it didn't matter that a huge proportion of Americans didn't believe blacks and whites should intermarry. You are talking intellectual exercises while millions of people are being discriminated against.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kuciwalker View PostNo it wouldn't. It is entirely consistent with the notion that there is an easy metaphor in the use of the word marriage to describe same-sex unions.
Comment
-
A huge proportion? Funny last I checked the number of people in the US supporting gay marriage was above 50%.
Which leaves something like 45%+ on the other side. I'm not going to argue with you over the definition of "huge".
Then again it doesn't really matter what proportion are for or against, just like it didn't matter that a huge proportion of Americans didn't believe blacks and whites should intermarry.
It absolutely did matter because in a democracy even constitutional rights have only limited power to override the will of the people.
Comment
-
Originally posted by gribbler View PostThat's speculation on your part. The people performing the weddings between two men could have easily intended it as a literal marriage. That's the explanation that makes the most sense. If someone holds a funeral, I would think it was for an actual death and not something that died in a metaphorical sense.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Kuciwalker View PostIf someone held a funeral for something that was never alive (let's say for an idea) then you damn well would consider it a metaphor.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Kuciwalker View PostIt absolutely did matter because in a democracy even constitutional rights have only limited power to override the will of the people.
Comment
Comment