Thread: Gay Marriage
View Single Post
Old 02-03-2009, 11:52 PM   #31
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
No, you brought it up and I simply deconstructed it.
I never said the US was allowed to construct permanent social classes. I said that it was once impossible to marry outside your race, religion and social class. Heck, it still is, for a lot of people. This in your unchanging Traditional Marriage.

Quote:
Yeah, and I'm part Native American big fat hairy deal. The other stuff was just rampent idiocy because people didn't consider people of different colors to be human.

This isn't China, this is the United States of America.

But they were allowed, granted people didn't have the understanding they do today, but it was allowed.

Then myself and a bunch of other people wouldn't exist, granted there were people at the time that didn't consider people of different colors to be human, but that really doesn't have anything to do with this topic.

The Woman's right to vote is in the US Constitution.
Are you really this ignorant of the history of civil rights and woman's rights in your own homeland, I wonder.

Yes, today universal suffrage is in the US Constitution. Today it is recognized that you have a right to have a divorce without getting shunned by your community and peers. Today white American women can marry African-American men without having their houses burned down.

Today.

Don't you realize that the nation you live in may have been different fifty or even twenty years ago? Do you know when it became recognized, legally, that spousal rape was an actual crime, subject of punishment? In 1996. Why do I bring up spousal rape? Because you seem to be under the impression that since something is ridiculous to you, it can't have been a big deal to other people in another day. This is, to be blunt, wrong.

Quote:
So are you saying we should allow exploitation of children because the Greeks did it? Seriously, this country was founded under Judeo-Christian Values, not ancient Greek Values.
I think you know yourself that this is not what I suggested. Stop being silly.

Oh, and I can't let your history revisionist attempt slip... the US was not founded on Judea-Christian values and whoever has managed to convince you otherwise is either pushing history revisionism, or a victim of same.

EDIT: Wait, wait, wait... are you OK with a 26 year old man marrying a girl who's just reached puberty? I mean, since it's between a male and a female and all ?

Quote:
Like it or not this affects everyone, and it really ticks off a lot of people, further there is a way to use the acceptance of this to allow other things as well because otherwise it would be violating the 1st and 14th Amendment of the United States Consitution.
Like it or not inter-racial marriage was believed to affect a lot of people, ticked a lot of people off, and was accused of being the top of a slippery slope that'd allow other horrible things such as homosexual marriage, bigamy and child marriages.

You keep saying that inter-racial marriage is trivial while same-sex marriage is this big deal. It isn't like that. Inter-racial marriage was probably a far, far bigger deal than same-sex marriage is now, and opponents pushed more or less precisely the same arguments you do.

Oh, and you do realize that your entire argument is one big Appeal To Tradition, I hope?

Quote:
Like it or not this affects everyone, and it really ticks off a lot of people, further there is a way to use the acceptance of this to allow other things as well because otherwise it would be violating the 1st and 14th Amendment of the United States Consitution.
How, exactly, does this follow? Bigamy is not a violation of your 1st Amendment 14th Amendment rights, but would be if gays were allowed to marry? I'm also curious as to what on earth marriage has to do with the 1st amendment in the first place.

I'm also curious as to why bigamists can't use the slippery slope argument with other 'redefinitions of marriage' and say that since we're redefined marriage to include inter-racial marriage, then we're perfectly justified in redefining it further to allow bigamy. Oh, wait, let me guess... inter-racial marriage doesn't count because it's still between a man and a woman.


Last edited by Dagobahn Eagle; 02-04-2009 at 12:13 AM.
Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,