• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.
Let me answer that last one by referring to my recent re-viewing of the film, 'Judgement at Nurmemburg" I believe is the title with Spencer Tracy as Chief Judge and the attorney for the Nazi judges brilliantly played by Maxaimillion Shell. One of the strongest points he made for the rationale of the behavior of Judges sentencing some people to forced sterilization was (and I am paraphrasing) "The Judiciary does not Make Law! The role of the Judiciary is to enforce law!!"

And you, sir, should be right at home with that logic whether it concerns a law regarding forced sterilization, a law regarding a re-definition of marriage, or a law which states that the constitutional provision as to "no Thing but Gold and Silver Coin be made a tender" can mean paper or anything else the government so chooses.
That being the case, I'm sure, you as well would have been right at home and in the same corner of the judge on trial, Ernst Janning, played by Burt Lancaster. A good movie for all Deep Thinking Thinkers to view and ponder, especially American lawyers and judges who have chosen to check thieir brains and their consciences at the court room door.

A lot of words, none of which answered the question I put to you. But that's no surprise since you kept ducking that same question on the other thread.

I'll ask it again, are there cases in controversy at law that the judiciary lacks the authority to settle?

Please, let's not derail with discussions of your ludicrous theories about the monetary authority.
 
So at the Parent Teacher conference, Heather has two Mommies but no daddy? How about if Heather has 3 Mommies? How about 10 Mommies, but no Daddy? At some point doesn't Heather become uh, confused? Are there any limits at all to an amoral anything goes society? What?

Heather probably isn't confused at all about her mommies. She has X mommies and they all love her. What probably confuses her are all the people that call her family immoral degenerate perverts. After all she knows her home is full of love and support.
 
No harm? Taken to its logical extreme, same sex marriage is a suicide pact for the species.

So do you also oppose marriage among heterosexuals who cannot have children? Some of us have chosen to have vasectomies and hysterectomies. What about women who've experienced menopause? Don't you think they shouldn't be allowed to marry since they can't have children?

And by the way, the population right now is about 7 billion. For thousands of years--indeed, for most of human history--world population was less than 1 billion. So what threat to species do you perceive being posed by same sex marriage? (Aren't you concerned that our population is "unnaturally" high? Without all our high-tech food production we couldn't support this population.)

And exactly how is there any logical extension of legalizing same sex marriage and the suicide of the species?

You do realize that banning same sex marriage in no way encourages gay people to suddenly have children, don't you?

Or do you suppose it does?

You obviously have some very nutty ideas, so I'm curious to know what this one is.
 
Only the substantive ones that appear to come from adults. Ad hominems don't work with me.

I tried to come up with an irony motivational that is similar this post. I couldn't find anything even remotely close.

Most people here have been very mature about this whole subject (and others you are involved with) and it is you who have been rude. I personally "don't have a dog" in this fight, to borrow the phrase from up thread, but I have two gay uncles (because they are married to each other), worked closely with several gays most of my adult life, have gay schoolmates, and broken bread with many a gay and I think it is terrible how they are treated because people just like you.

You really should be ashamed of yourself.
 
So at the Parent Teacher conference, Heather has two Mommies but no daddy? How about if Heather has 3 Mommies? How about 10 Mommies, but no Daddy? At some point doesn't Heather become uh, confused? Are there any limits at all to an amoral anything goes society? What?

10 mommies? Come on. Be serious. Just buy more pizza! It's really no problem, snookums.

x0x0

call me ;)
 
So at the Parent Teacher conference, Heather has two Mommies but no daddy? How about if Heather has 3 Mommies? How about 10 Mommies, but no Daddy? At some point doesn't Heather become uh, confused? Are there any limits at all to an amoral anything goes society? What?
If heterosexuals being married doesn't lead to multiple husbands or wives then gays being married won't lead to the same. That's your limit. In any event, I wouldn't care if there were multiple husbands and/or wives. Heather can figure it out.
 
I've never seen anyone like Robert of the family Prey who was so far in the closet...

Agree. I bet Robert Prey is damn near Narnia by now.

Robert Prey, "natural law" and "common sense" do not exist. You've invented them as protection against having to examine your prejudices.

Or his desires.

No harm? Taken to its logical extreme, same sex marriage is a suicide pact for the species.

Wow. Just...Wow.

Only fools are "fooled" by magicians.

This coming from a guy who believes Peter Popoff. (Poe's Law notwithstanding).

Just like letting infertile or older people get married would be a disaster because no offspring are possible? Your concern for the critical shortage of children on the planet is truly overwhelming.

Don't forget Robert Prey believes you can feed the nation's starving kids with grocery store samples.
 
I'm not aware that ever happens with human beings. An important distinction.
True, humans reproduce sexually, but in your original quote you stated:
That Nature, Mother Nature or the God of Nature has willed that male and female be united for the propagation of the species, is self evident, and therefore not subject to irrational argument
As I stated before, many, if not most species actually reproduce asexually, also sexually reproduction is newer, so life began asexually. Many species successfully propagated before gender existed, and many continue to do so. Both sexual and asexual reproduction is natural.

Also in every species that uses sexual reproduction that has been observed has shown same-gender sexual behavior. Your claim that homosexuality is unnatural and necessary for propagation is contradicted by all available evidence.
 
For those arguing that this is a very narrow ruling, listen to Ted Olsen's take on it (good stuff starts at about 2:00 minutes):

 
Allowing more people the right to marry-->taken to its extreme we eventually can marry anything in any number!

Restricting marriage to certain groups-->taken to its extreme marriage is eventually outlawed altogether.


So, for some reason that line of arguing doesn't do much for me.
 
So at the Parent Teacher conference, Heather has two Mommies but no daddy? How about if Heather has 3 Mommies? How about 10 Mommies, but no Daddy? At some point doesn't Heather become uh, confused? Are there any limits at all to an amoral anything goes society? What?


So do you similarly oppose divorced folks from remarrying? After all, in such cases the child will have two mommies—the biological mom and the step mom. And they also have two daddies—the biological dad and the step dad. Isn't that also just as confusing of the child and thus deserving of your concern?
 
No, because they don't have that filthy, filthy anal sex that Robert goes on and on about for some reason.

I'm not entirely sure what keeps heterosexuals from going in the backdoor. Maybe it has something to do with natural laws?
 
No harm? Taken to its logical extreme, same sex marriage is a suicide pact for the species.

Why? It hasn't suddenly become compulsary for everyone to form same sex marriages, so the birth rate is unlikely to be affected.

Maybe same sex couples will adopt kids rather than make their own. Do you have any idea of the number of kids around the world that need a loving home? Adopted kids generally don't care whether the people that have taken them in are black, white, male, female or Martians as long as they are loved and looked after.
 
"Common Sense" = That which one believes is true so strongly one assumes everyone else must also.

Exactly. There is a similar phenomena called "everyone knows that!". A friend of mine is a huge Star Trek fan who will talk about obscure details of the Trek universe, such as the supposed theory behind the transporter, and will be genuinely confused when someone asks him what the hell he is talking about. You can almost see the thought on his face "but, everyone knows that!".

Unfortunately, real common sense*, is as common as unicorn poo.

* Real common senseTM is something that everyone knows because it is blindingly obvious to anyone capable of tying their own shoe laces.
 
So at the Parent Teacher conference, Heather has two Mommies but no daddy?

So what? Unless they introduce themseleves as Mum1 and Mum2, who Cares? As long as the child is being looked after properly who gives a **** what gender the parents are?

How about if Heather has 3 Mommies? How about 10 Mommies, but no Daddy?

Silly arguement is silly. We're talking about same sex marriage, not polygamy.

At some point doesn't Heather become uh, confused?

Not if the parents have a brain and can explain to their child that families come in different sizes and varieties. No more than a child without a mum or dad would be confused.

Are there any limits at all to an amoral anything goes society? What?

Who says that same sex marriage is amoral, or immoral? You? God? The bible?
 

Back
Top Bottom