• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Rick Santorum is an idiot, a bigot, and morally inconsistent...

joobz said:
Well, it seems you are exactly Rick Santorum's key constituents.

For the sake of our country, I am happy to know that you are in the minority.
Click to expand...

I agree about the Santorum key components/constituents thing!!! Frooooothy!!:D
 
RandFan said:
A right you hold for yourself and deny others is not a right but a privilege. A person who claims that he believes in the rights of others but works to deny them those rights is intellectually dishonest.
Click to expand...

A person who believes that homosexual marriage is marriage is living a moral delusion and confusion.
 
RandFan said:
A right you hold for yourself and deny others is not a right but a privilege. A person who claims that he believes in the rights of others but works to deny them those rights is intellectually dishonest.
Click to expand...

Is there any limit to your definition of "marriage". How about marriage between father and daughter? Mother and son? Brother and sister? Brother and brother? How about marriage between human and dog? Or marriage with 10 wives? Or ten husbands? How about marriage between adult and child? Say age 50 and age 7?
Do you have any limits at all to your idea of "rights" and "freedom"????? If so, lay them out. If not, say so.
 
Robert Prey said:
Is there any limit to your definition of "marriage". How about marriage between father and daughter? Mother and son? Brother and sister? Brother and brother? How about marriage between human and dog? Or marriage with 10 wives? Or ten husbands? How about marriage between adult and child? Say age 50 and age 7?
Click to expand...

I would not be at all surprised if you were the progeny of one (or more) of the above examples.
 
Robert Prey said:
Is there any limit to your definition of "marriage". How about marriage between father and daughter? Mother and son? Brother and sister? Brother and brother? How about marriage between human and dog? Or marriage with 10 wives? Or ten husbands? How about marriage between adult and child? Say age 50 and age 7?
Do you have any limits at all to your idea of "rights" and "freedom"????? If so, lay them out. If not, say so.
Click to expand...

Robert, without going back and checking, I fairly sure this has been addressed already.

Marriage between consenting adults cannot be too difficult for you to grasp. Adding a stipulation that they cannot be immediate family members is also not so hard. (From a legal perspective, it would be largely redundant.)

I think marriage between multiple members is a bad idea and I think there are a number of legal issues that would have to be figured out first. However, I can't come up with any logical reason why it should be denied, if all parties are consenting adults. I'm not even sure why you are against it, since there is a whole mess of polygamy going on in the Bible. If God was cool with it, why aren't you?

For that matter, Lot's daughters had sex with him. Abraham married his half-sister. Jacob married two sisters, who were also his first cousins. Moses's parents were nephew and aunt. What, exactly, are you basing your definition of marriage on?
 
Upchurch said:
Robert, without going back and checking, I fairly sure this has been addressed already.

Marriage between consenting adults cannot be too difficult for you to grasp. Adding a stipulation that they cannot be immediate family members is also not so hard. (From a legal perspective, it would be largely redundant.)

I think marriage between multiple members is a bad idea and I think there are a number of legal issues that would have to be figured out first. However, I can't come up with any logical reason why it should be denied, if all parties are consenting adults. I'm not even sure why you are against it, since there is a whole mess of polygamy going on in the Bible. If God was cool with it, why aren't you?

For that matter, Lot's daughters had sex with him. Abraham married his half-sister. Jacob married two sisters, who were also his first cousins. Moses's parents were nephew and aunt. What, exactly, are you basing your definition of marriage on?
Click to expand...

Common sense and the Common Law. Nice to hear you admit to endorsing incest and polygamy as a fundamental "right."
 
Robert Prey said:
Is there any limit to your definition of "marriage". How about marriage between father and daughter? Mother and son? Brother and sister? Brother and brother? How about marriage between human and dog? Or marriage with 10 wives? Or ten husbands? How about marriage between adult and child? Say age 50 and age 7?
Do you have any limits at all to your idea of "rights" and "freedom"????? If so, lay them out. If not, say so.
Click to expand...
First off, traditonal marriage included one man with multiple wives. We don't allow that today even though each separate marriage is a bond between a man and woman. Your slippery slope fails. Each case must be evaluated on its own. In the Prop 8 trial, plaintiffs made a case that there was a compelling interest to grant marriage to same sex couples as there was a large community of same sex couples. Sociological data was provided to support the case that same sex marriage was good for communities and the couples. No data to counter that claim was ever given.

Consent. Harm. Benefits. These must be weighed in each case. Show me that a community of consenting adults that meets your criteria exists and that this community is demanding marriage rights and THEN we can talk.
 
Robert Prey said:
Common sense and the Common Law. Nice to hear you admit to endorsing incest and polygamy as a fundamental "right."
Click to expand...
It helps if you read what I wrote. It would help more if you actually read the Bible, but that would require effort and self-examination. I do, however, find it interesting that you cite the Bible when it suits your purposes, but ignores it when incontinent. Doesn't the Holy Script of your religious beliefs have something to say about that?

"Common sense" is another way of saying "my opinion that I can't really justify". Quebec recognizes same-sex common law partners. So, your basis for the definition is completely arbitrary and really based on exclusion, hatred (revulsion or loathing, if you prefer), and bigotry.
 
Upchurch said:
It helps if you read what I wrote. It would help more if you actually read the Bible, but that would require effort and self-examination. I do, however, find it interesting that you cite the Bible when it suits your purposes, but ignores it when incontinent. Doesn't the Holy Script of your religious beliefs have something to say about that?
Click to expand...

To be fair, I don't think the Holy Script has anything in there about what you should do when incontinent, though I do find myself ignoring all else if I am in such a state. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom