Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > General Blabber > Proposition 8 - Totally Gay Corollary Observations
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread: Proposition 8 - Totally Gay Corollary Observations Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Dec 29th, 2008 01:20 AM
executioneer oh man the lord hates esauhlim poor guy
Dec 28th, 2008 11:39 PM
Colonel Flagg Malachi 1:3 (KJV) - And I [the LORD] hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.

Are they equating Arabs with Fags?

The Luke verse is also quite the stretch of interpretation.

If these people weren't so annoying, they'd be quite amusing.
Dec 25th, 2008 02:03 AM
liquidstatik ..
Dec 23rd, 2008 09:50 PM
10,000 Volt Ghost "The proponents argued for exclusively heterosexual marriage and claimed that failure to reverse a Supreme Court ruling from May 2008 that recognized a right of same-sex couples to marry would damage society, require changes to what was taught in schools about marriage, and threaten the free exercise of religion."

"The opponents argued that eliminating the rights of any Californian and mandating that one group of people be treated differently from everyone else was unfair and wrong."

Can we get back on topic?
Dec 23rd, 2008 05:10 PM
Pub Lover I don't fuck animals, but I know why some people would.

I suggest we allow people to fuck animals as long as they put their name on a list.

I do not want to shake the hand of anyone on such a list.
Dec 23rd, 2008 05:00 PM
kahljorn maybe some stupid people do ;o

but the intelligent ones just use it as a criticism for somebody else's argument. It's not so much that "WE SHOULDNT DO THIS BECAUSE IT WILL LEAD TO THIS" so much as, "We shouldn't do this for this reason because that reason also entails this."
Dec 23rd, 2008 04:53 PM
Dr. Boogie Well now I'm just completely lost. I came into the discussion because I wanted to point out that gay marriage -> bestiality is a fallacy, but in doing so, I have apparently altered someone else's argument. Or my own, I've lost track at this point.

I'm getting the sense that no one really thinks that gay marriage could lead to things like bestiality being legal, so... good, I guess.
Dec 23rd, 2008 04:43 PM
kahljorn I'm annoyed because you act like I'm making a bad argument when you clearly don't even understand the nature of a criticism ;/

and because people act like gay marriage is right for stupid reasons. "JUSTG BECAUSE" most of the time. Its just as dumb the shit antisamesex marriage people say.
Dec 23rd, 2008 04:41 PM
kahljorn
Quote:
So I ask you: what is your opinion of mind controlled marriages?
Obviously that is non-consensual, so no ;o.

Quote:
The reason I ask is because the slippery slope is the one I see thrown out the most as why we shouldn't legalize gay marriage. I want people who honestly believe that legalizing gay marriage will lead to legalizing bestiality and such to stop and think for a moment.
Oh, I understand. No I don't think I or deadkennedy are talking about gay marriage actually eventually resulting in bestiality or marrying inanimate objects. It's just a criticism of somebody's reasoning. Personally, I don't think legalizing gay marriage would ever result in bestiality. However, people give out extremely sloppy reasons for legalizing gay marriage.When people give out sloppy reasons why gay marriage should be supported, they sometimes inadvertantly give a reason why bestial marriage should be supported, as well.
Maybe some people misunderstand that type of criticism and assume it means that it will actually lead to bestiality, but it doesn't actually say whether gay marriage is good or bad or will actually lead to these things. Only that the reasons which somebody has given could also be given as reasons to support this other thing

It's similar to this: Let's say somebody defines good sexual acts as things which are natural (which people usually do because they think gay sex is unnatural, to which people usually point to the tons of animals which are gay or bisexual). In nature, usually male animals pretty much mate by raping female animals. So, it's good to rape women ;/
But nobody thinks that making a criticism like that would be bad, right? Naturalistic arguments are horrible.

Quote:
On the contrary, what I was saying had very little to do with gays at all. I was answering your question of why pedophiles and zoophiles shouldn't be allowed to get married. At this point, gay marriage is barely even involved in the discussion
Yea, I'm trying to explain to you how animal marriage is relevant to this topic. I hope you understand now.

Everybody knows they shouldn't be able to get married. That's why it makes an efficient criticism.
Quote:
Of course, the irony is that I declined to talk about the age of consent because I felt like it would be getting off topic.
Me too, but you didn't really stay on the topic. You changed an argument which attacked one set of premises to another which had better premises to make it seem like the other person's argument is ridiculous. That's completely changing the topic.
Dec 23rd, 2008 04:23 PM
Dr. Boogie This is exactly why they took analogies out of the SATs.
Dec 23rd, 2008 04:18 PM
Dimnos If you cant see the difference between two same sex people getting married and someone getting married to a dog then I dont know what to tell you. The fact that you keep bringing up the same lame arguments and are now resorting to name calling is just proof that this conversation is going no where fast. Once again we are simply going to have to agree to disagree.
Dec 23rd, 2008 04:12 PM
Dr. Boogie
Quote:
also retarded and stupid people shouldn't be allowed to get married because what the fuck do they know about the ramifications of marriage? They are incompetent.
How do you define "retarded" and "stupid"?

Quote:
What's your opinion about group marriages, polygamous marriages, adolescent marriage alien marriage and marriage with anything that's disgusting but capable of consenting?
Group and polygamy: eh, I've got nothing against them. But as for adolescents marrying aliens, I must point out that aliens have technology far superior to our own. Why, in "Destroy All Humans!", the main character was able to use mind control to manipulate the human population. So I ask you: what is your opinion of mind controlled marriages?

Quote:
it doesn't really matter if the reasons somebody is stating for not taking something as fact will ever be considered a good thing by most people in society. The fact that everybody thinks it is bad is part of what gives it so much weight. Their reasoning is sloppy enough that it could just as easily allow horse marriage as gay marriage -- and nobody wants horse marriage.
The reason I ask is because the slippery slope is the one I see thrown out the most as why we shouldn't legalize gay marriage. I want people who honestly believe that legalizing gay marriage will lead to legalizing bestiality and such to stop and think for a moment. That gay marriage is legal doesn't lead directly to men marrying children. If they can't explain what happens in the interim to change these acts from taboos to accepted lifestyles, then their argument is chaff not fit for the horses they fear will be married.

Quote:
What you've done is just change the definition or reason why gays should get married from, "THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT CAUSE THEY WANNA" (which is usually people's initial reasoning) to MARRIAGE SHOULD ONLY BE BETWEEN CONSENTING ADULTS, which as I mentioned earlier, is a better argument. but it still has holes.
On the contrary, what I was saying had very little to do with gays at all. I was answering your question of why pedophiles and zoophiles shouldn't be allowed to get married. At this point, gay marriage is barely even involved in the discussion. Of course, the irony is that I declined to talk about the age of consent because I felt like it would be getting off topic.

Oh, vanity, thy name is Dr. Boogie!
Dec 23rd, 2008 03:47 PM
kahljorn I've noticed that idiots on the internet like to pretend like they have invested so much intelligent thought into something but really they just want the gratification of people seeing that they've thought about it and in reality they have no reasoning or thought process only I THINK LIKE THIS MAKE IT SO *CLAP*.

There's nothing different about samesex marriage supporters and detractors. Neither has a single good argument or reasoning, and both sides are a bunch of assholes who just want to state their opinions.

and my tits aren't fake, dummy. And duh I'm being argumentative. But that's because you guys make stupid arguments ;/

Quote:
No need to get nasty man. Just having a debate. That was in response to the ad absurdum of "our society will have to accept bestiality"
Exactly. You're retarded like everyone else in this thread who can't see the logic behind that.

SUPPORTERS OF GAY MARRIAGE: Gay people should be able to get married because they want to.
UNSUPPORTERS OF GAY MARRIAGE: So people should be able to get married to animals because they want to.

same logical form. Quite frankly, if people who are supporting gay marriage don't want bestiality to be brought up, THEN MAYBE THEY SHOULDNT MAKE RETARDED ARGUMENTS.

Quote:
You can easily make the law say marriage is between two consenting adults.
You can easily make the law say that marriage is between up to ten consenting adults. Or that it's only between a man and woman.

And if you're going to limit marriage to two people, why not limit to opposite genders?

Quote:
Polygamists in the USA today have a legal marriage to their 1st wife or whatever and the others just live there or nearby and say they are married. Because you can only be married to one person at a time in the USA, we wouldnt have to change that now would we? This works fine for them and they dont complain.
So why don't gay people just pretend they are married. I mean, a gay guy could marry a woman THEN on the side have like an extra husband. Perfect.

These social problems are really easy to solve.

Quote:
This works fine for them and they dont complain.
You're a fucking idiot. There are some people trying to get rights to polygamy.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&fkt=1064&fsdt=4457&q=%22legalize+poly gamy%22&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

Quote:
Your argument was that if we let gay people get married then we would have to let people who want to marry kids get married to kids. I was saying that people already marry kids and you cant blame gay marriage on that.
Nobody blamed gay marriage for it being possible to get married before age 18. I think you misunderstand the nature of criticism entirely.
Dec 23rd, 2008 02:31 PM
McClain I've noticed that Kal is just being argumentative. We all know that bisexual dudes with fake tits like to twist things up for their own gratification.
Dec 23rd, 2008 01:38 PM
Dimnos
Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
Group marriages often have more than one of the same sex, I would assume. So like, 3 guys and 4 girls would be group marriage. Whereas 1 guy and 5 girls would be polygamous.
Ok. Thank you for the clarification.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
Yea and I responded to it, you vapid fuck. Polygamous marriages are between consenting adults. Do you notice how that's relevant? Do you need me to underline "consenting adults"?
No need to get nasty man. Just having a debate. That was in response to the ad absurdum of "our society will have to accept bestiality"

Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
good idea. Or if we started sending all apes to school.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
Uh, what are you some kind of mentally retarded person? You can't JUST SAY IT. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A REASON. And it would be one marriage. One huge marriage. But why should you only be able to have one marriage? There's no reason why, it's just prejudice. Probably, it has the same supposed religious roots as antisamesex shit.
I can just say that gays shouldn't be able to get married at any time.
You can easily make the law say marriage is between two consenting adults.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
and using the "Natural" argument is retarded. For one, there is nothing natural about marriage. Two, what happens in a lion's pride and many early societies were polygamous rather than monogamous.
Natural is ambigious. It could refer to anything that exists. When he said that i thought it was a joke because its so ridiculous.
"Natural" who said any of this was "Natural"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
and what do you mean just fine and dandy? POLYGAMY IS ILLEGAL.
Polygamists in the USA today have a legal marriage to their 1st wife or whatever and the others just live there or nearby and say they are married. Because you can only be married to one person at a time in the USA, we wouldnt have to change that now would we? This works fine for them and they dont complain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
samesex marriage isn't only illegal because people don't like gays.
court or parental approval is necessary. most to 16
Your argument was that if we let gay people get married then we would have to let people who want to marry kids get married to kids. I was saying that people already marry kids and you cant blame gay marriage on that.
Dec 23rd, 2008 01:18 PM
kahljorn
Quote:
what is the difference between group and polygamous marriages?
Group marriages often have more than one of the same sex, I would assume. So like, 3 guys and 4 girls would be group marriage. Whereas 1 guy and 5 girls would be polygamous.

Quote:
I think he answered it right there. Consenting adults. That is where you draw the line.
Yea and I responded to it, you vapid fuck. Polygamous marriages are between consenting adults. Do you notice how that's relevant? Do you need me to underline "consenting adults"?

Quote:
And aliens? Really dude? Next you will be saying that in the future dogs will have cyborg brains and therefore can consent and yada yada yada...
good idea. Or if we started sending all apes to school.

Quote:
Not to mention we can easily say one marriage at a time. There are plenty of polygamist in the USA and they seam to be just fine and dandy doing things the way they have been.
Uh, you can't JUST SAY IT. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A REASON. And it would be one marriage. One huge marriage. But why should you only be able to have one marriage? There's no reason why, it's just prejudice. Probably, it has the same religious/cultural roots as antisamesex shit.
I can just say that gays shouldn't be able to get married at any time.

ok i said it i guess the argument is over on that one

and using the "Natural" argument is retarded. For one, there is nothing natural about marriage. Two, what happens in a lion's pride and many early societies were polygamous rather than monogamous.
Natural is ambigious. It could refer to anything that exists. When he said that i thought it was a joke because its so ridiculous.

and what do you mean just fine and dandy? POLYGAMY IS ILLEGAL.

Quote:
18 is the legal age of consent. Not just for sex but for anything. You cant sign any contracts before 18 (or if you do, you cant be legally held to it) this includes marriage. Now some states do allow people under the age of 18 to get married. I dont have a list of these states or what their requirements for marriage to people under the age of 18 are but it happens and its legal no matter how much people dont like it.
samesex marriage isn't only illegal because people don't like gays.
court or parental approval is necessary. most to 16
Dec 23rd, 2008 12:25 PM
AChimp PPS. Seriously.
Dec 23rd, 2008 12:25 PM
AChimp PS. It's nothing.
Dec 23rd, 2008 12:24 PM
AChimp Homos have been allowed to get married in Canada for a few years now, and look what's happened to us! :O
Dec 23rd, 2008 11:24 AM
Dimnos
Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
Don't forget that all of these relationships are capable of complete consent and understanding: group marriages, polygamous marriages, adolescents, aliens.
Just to be clear... what is the difference between group and polygamous marriages? And aliens? Really dude? Next you will be saying that in the future dogs will have cyborg brains and therefore can consent and yada yada yada...


Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
Quote:
Just past allowing consenting adults being allowed to marry each other, and just short of allowing adults to marry children, animals, and inanimate objects.
Its easy to say that, but more difficult to give a reason why it should stop there if it doesn't stop at homosexuals and group marriages. People say, "LET THE HOMOSEXUALS HAVE WHAT THEY WANT AND BE HAPPY." Well, why not let people who are in to bestiality have what they want and be happy?
I think he answered it right there. Consenting adults. That is where you draw the line.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
As for consenting adults, a man could marry 50 consenting women. Is there anything wrong with that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Boogie View Post
Sure, if someone can make a convincing argument that certain people, when they are born, have a natural perdilection towards polygamy, and that it is not merely a choice they make when they subscribe to a certain religion.
Not to mention we can easily say one marriage at a time. There are plenty of polygamist in the USA and they seam to be just fine and dandy doing things the way they have been.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
Why shouldn't "adults" be able to marry mature "adolescents"? The only reason most people can think of is because the law says that adults can't fuck children (and they can't enter legally binding contracts...). Well, WHAT IF THEY DONT FUCK THEM until they are 18? Are all marriages about sex?
And the law isn't really a viable means to assess competency and the ability to consent, so maybe some adolescents should have the right to be able to marry
18 is the legal age of consent. Not just for sex but for anything. You cant sign any contracts before 18 (or if you do, you cant be legally held to it) this includes marriage. Now some states do allow people under the age of 18 to get married. I dont have a list of these states or what their requirements for marriage to people under the age of 18 are but it happens and its legal no matter how much people dont like it.
Dec 23rd, 2008 01:28 AM
kahljorn
Quote:
Those are just a few, but you bring a good point: not that many adults understand the ramifications of getting married. If grown men and women are having trouble wrapping their brains around this stuff, what chance do our kids and pets stand?
Don't forget that all of these relationships are capable of complete consent and understanding: group marriages, polygamous marriages, adolescents, aliens.

also retarded and stupid people shouldn't be allowed to get married because what the fuck do they know about the ramifications of marriage? They are incompetent.

What's your opinion about group marriages, polygamous marriages, adolescent marriage alien marriage and marriage with anything that's disgusting but capable of consenting?

Quote:
how do you envision those acts gaining the same level of support that is currently enjoyed by gay marriage (that is, where enough people are in favor of legalizing it that it is a subject of significant debate)?
it doesn't really matter if the reasons somebody is stating for not taking something as fact will ever be considered a good thing by most people in society. The fact that everybody thinks it is bad is part of what gives it so much weight. Their reasoning is sloppy enough that it could just as easily allow horse marriage as gay marriage -- and nobody wants horse marriage.

What you've done is just change the definition or reason why gays should get married from, "THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT CAUSE THEY WANNA" (which is usually people's initial reasoning) to MARRIAGE SHOULD ONLY BE BETWEEN CONSENTING ADULTS, which as I mentioned earlier, is a better argument. but it still has holes.
And anyway, it takes the criticism towards one set of reasoning and makes it look ridiculous by applying it to another set of reasoning. In short, you are a straw man.
Dec 22nd, 2008 11:16 PM
pac-man I thought it was because they always voted "Naaaaay"
Dec 22nd, 2008 10:58 PM
Dr. Boogie The bottom line is that a horse broke Christopher Reeves' spine, and because of that, horses will never be allowed to mare-y.
Dec 22nd, 2008 10:53 PM
kahljorn Dr. Boogie, if we've learned anything from this thread its that we don't care what religions think and they are just discriminatory and prejudiced towards equestrians-human relationships.
Dont let their prejudice and hatred steer america down the wrong path

and dr. boogie people just have to learn that getting married is frivolous and stupid, and understanding the ramifications are unimportant -- then everything will be fine.
Dec 22nd, 2008 10:42 PM
Dr. Boogie
Quote:
Originally Posted by kahljorn View Post
I don't really think very many adults understand the ramifications of getting married ;o what are the ramifications?
We've seen a bunch mentioned in this thread already: insurance and tax breaks are some of the secular parts of marriage. Then you've got to deal with members of the religious community who have objections to that particular union. They thought they has issues with Adam and Steve getting married, but that was before they ran into Cynthia and Seabiscuit.

Those are just a few, but you bring a good point: not that many adults understand the ramifications of getting married. If grown men and women are having trouble wrapping their brains around this stuff, what chance do our kids and pets stand?

Edit:

And while I'm asking questions, I have one for those of you who believe gay marriage is on a slippery slope leading down towards bestiality, pedophilia, marrying your VCR, etc: how do you envision those acts gaining the same level of support that is currently enjoyed by gay marriage (that is, where enough people are in favor of legalizing it that it is a subject of significant debate)?
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:00 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.