Gay Marriage Ruled Legal in Connecticut

[kahljorn]

Originally Posted by jeanette

That is a valid counterpoint. Much better than your initial arguement that interracial marriage devalued the institution of marriage for bigots and therefore should be illegal.

Originally Posted by oneofkahljornsfirstpostsaboutinterracialmarriages

Yep. And it still bothers a lot of (racist) people when they see a black and white walking around holding hands. Hasn't the divorce rate also climbed for a while with it being at about 40% right now? Maybe that's all due to blacks and whites being allowed to marry eachother. lol Plus hasn't there been less marriages over the years and more children born outside of marriages as well?
and also blacks and whites marrying isn't as common a thing as gay people marrying probably would be. Besides that, at least blacks and whites marrying was between a man and a woman.next thing you know we'll have a 90% divorce rate and people arguing for group marriages and other abominable marriages which i won't even touch on!

Guess i've been good at this all along, huh?
And, actually, the point was never that it devalues it for BIGOTS ONLY, but that it devalued it as an institution period and caused the divorce rate to climb.

Originally Posted by jeanette

I'd also like to point out that recent studies have shown that the children of divorced parents are no more likely to have emotional problems than other children.

Oh, yea? Which study is that? And what about children born out of wedlock, another scenario which I focused on. In fact, I even mentioned on this page of the thread that NEVER HAVING TWO PARENTS is much different than having parents AND THEN them getting divorced.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

I agree. Especially if there are children in the household! but you could ask which would be in their best interest... and anyway, there is a difference between having two parents in your life for the first ten years and then them divorcing, than never having two parents.

Jeanette your problem is that you like to use stock arguments which you've memorized, so you tend to focus on the arguments which spark those stock arguments. Usually you don't even apply them correctly, though.

and learn to take a joke for fucks sake.

You're getting better at this.

Why do you keep trying to insult my intelligence?

[Jeanette X]

I will return to this thread and give your arguements proper attention when I am no longer suffering from diarrhea brought on by the consumption of aspertame-laden Diet Red Bull.

[Jeanette X]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

And, actually, the point was never that it devalues it for BIGOTS ONLY, but that it devalued it as an institution period and caused the divorce rate to climb.

Correlation doesn't equal causation. Simply because the divorce rate went up after interracial marriage became legal doesn't mean interracial marriage caused it. Its like saying that ice cream sales cause drowning because they both go up in the summer. Furthermore, if we were to extend your arguement, would you say that schools should still be segregated because integration devalues the institution?

Oh, yea? Which study is that?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/...behavior_N.htm

And what about children born out of wedlock, another scenario which I focused on.

What about it?

Jeanette your problem is that you like to use stock arguments which you've memorized, so you tend to focus on the arguments which spark those stock arguments.

Eh, perhaps I do.

Why do you keep trying to insult my intelligence?

Because:
A. You insult mine
B. Your arguments are rather preposterus
C. This is I-Mockery.