4/2/2013 2:34 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 2:31:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 2:28:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 2:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 2:23:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 2:20:00 PM (view original):
Laws can be changed.  Based on your "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines, I expect you to be an active lobbyist for toaster marriage.
Changing the capacity requirements for contracts would be a big deal, much, much bigger than allowing more people to marry. Especially since gay marriages are already happening in several states.

I guess we already know the effect gay marriage has on everyone else: nothing.
Do you think a rash of toaster marriages would have an effect on anyone else?
It would be a pretty awesome tax loophole.


Tax laws can be changed. 
If you really want to marry your toaster so bad, feel free to try to get the law changed. I really don't care either way, but I'm guessing it's a long shot based on contract law.
Me and my toaster aren't tight like that.   I'm just aiming for EQUALITY FOR ALL based on your "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines.   I imagine there are a few inanimate object lovers out there and I see no reason to deprive them the right to marry.
4/2/2013 2:35 PM
OK, I won't stand in their way.

Now that we've finished that, why don't you want gays to marry?
4/2/2013 2:37 PM
Looks like bad_luck is just narrowly defining marriage to fit his personal agenda.  Everybody else be damned.

bad_luck is of the highest integrity and would NEVER narrowly define ANYTHING to fit his personal agenda. Come on, now, shouldn't we be able to tell that from his history of posting...oh yeah right NEVER MIND.
4/2/2013 2:38 PM
I'm still waiting for a good reason to allow it. 

The  "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines doesn't really work for me.  Well, until man and toaster can be united in holy matrimony.
4/2/2013 2:40 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 2:38:00 PM (view original):
I'm still waiting for a good reason to allow it. 

The  "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines doesn't really work for me.  Well, until man and toaster can be united in holy matrimony.
Why aren't,"they want to" and "it won't affect anyone else" enough for you to be ok with it?

Why are you in favor of more government regulation of private lives?
4/2/2013 2:42 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 2:38:00 PM (view original):
I'm still waiting for a good reason to allow it. 

The  "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines doesn't really work for me.  Well, until man and toaster can be united in holy matrimony.
How about this:

Higher rates of marriage strengthen families and have a positive effect on society. Gay couples raising children can get married now, making a lifetime commitment and stabilizing the family for their children.
4/2/2013 2:45 PM
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
4/2/2013 2:51 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 2:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 2:38:00 PM (view original):
I'm still waiting for a good reason to allow it. 

The  "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines doesn't really work for me.  Well, until man and toaster can be united in holy matrimony.
How about this:

Higher rates of marriage strengthen families and have a positive effect on society. Gay couples raising children can get married now, making a lifetime commitment and stabilizing the family for their children.
Quite frankly, I don't think gay families have been around long enough for us to know the effect on society.    I don't know that gay couples raising children and now getting married strengthens anything.    I don't believe marriage is a lifetime committment and I believe divorce rates back this up.

How about that?
4/2/2013 2:52 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
ASA and APA say there is no difference.
4/2/2013 2:55 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 2:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 2:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 2:38:00 PM (view original):
I'm still waiting for a good reason to allow it. 

The  "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines doesn't really work for me.  Well, until man and toaster can be united in holy matrimony.
How about this:

Higher rates of marriage strengthen families and have a positive effect on society. Gay couples raising children can get married now, making a lifetime commitment and stabilizing the family for their children.
Quite frankly, I don't think gay families have been around long enough for us to know the effect on society.    I don't know that gay couples raising children and now getting married strengthens anything.    I don't believe marriage is a lifetime committment and I believe divorce rates back this up.

How about that?
That's awful contrarian of you.

I think you're a *****. You don't want gays to marry but you're afraid to say so. So you hide behind "nobody's giving me a valid reason" and toaster marriage BS.
4/2/2013 3:05 PM
I think you know better than that.   If I didn't want gays to marry, I'm pretty sure you'd know it.

I'm just waiting for something better than your "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines.

They are as valid, IMO, as tec's "A traditional marriage is a man and a woman."   Which I find to be just as poor a reason to be against gay marriage.

Honestly, neither side has a valid reason in support of their viewpoint.
4/2/2013 3:08 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
I think you know better than that.   If I didn't want gays to marry, I'm pretty sure you'd know it.

I'm just waiting for something better than your "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines.

They are as valid, IMO, as tec's "A traditional marriage is a man and a woman."   Which I find to be just as poor a reason to be against gay marriage.

Honestly, neither side has a valid reason in support of their viewpoint.
Should the default position then be less individual rights or more individual rights?
4/2/2013 3:08 PM
BTW, in the 2010 census, only 25% of gay couples raise children.  

Of course, until the last hour, you've maintained that this has nothing to do with gay parenting.   Not sure why you changed your tune on that.
4/2/2013 3:10 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 2:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
ASA and APA say there is no difference.
Are you capable of independent, critical thought?  Or are you just going to blindly take what some random organization says at face value?
4/2/2013 3:12 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 3:08:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
I think you know better than that.   If I didn't want gays to marry, I'm pretty sure you'd know it.

I'm just waiting for something better than your "doesn't affect you", "makes more people happy" and "doesn't infringe upon anyone else's rights" guidelines.

They are as valid, IMO, as tec's "A traditional marriage is a man and a woman."   Which I find to be just as poor a reason to be against gay marriage.

Honestly, neither side has a valid reason in support of their viewpoint.
Should the default position then be less individual rights or more individual rights?
I'll go with "status quo" or "tradition".   

I don't think we're moving in the right direction, as a people, with regards to rights.   As you can tell "I ain't hurting nobody" isn't a "right" I agree with.
of 358

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.