4/4/2013 3:07 PM
"Yeah, sorry.  Equality is a priority unless it's complicated.  We just couldn't figure it out.  Best of luck anyway."
4/4/2013 3:10 PM
"Of course we want people to be happy with their marital status.   Just not you, you bisexual freak!!!!!  WHO THE **** LOVES TWO PEOPLE ENOUGH TO MARRY THEM?????"
4/4/2013 3:11 PM

"GET THE **** OUT OF OUR COUNTRY!!!!!!  MOVE BACK TO AFRICA IF YOU DON'T LIKE OUR LAWS!!!!!!  Oh, sorry, I think that was the saying when we discriminated against blacks.   Where do bisexuals come from?"

4/4/2013 3:14 PM
The point I'm trying to make is that how is something marriage if there's several different changes and clauses and situations to deal with to "make it marriage."  That doesn't happen when you allow SSM.  Like if someone wants to marry a toaster.  Well the toaster doesn't consent to it.  And what happens if they adopt kids? Does the toaster have a say in things? What happens if the human dies, does the toaster have rights?  Does the toaster have health benefits?  Can he go to the hospital and get fixed if he stops working, since he now has health benefits?

If I'm being hypocritical again, let me know.  I told you I'm not really against group marriages, but obviously there are things to consider before allowing them.  Apparently you don't want to me consider them, in the name of equality.  So allow it.

4/4/2013 3:15 PM
Yea, if we allow polygamous marriages, we'll have to allow toaster marriage.  And then self-marriage. And marrying oak trees.
4/4/2013 3:16 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/4/2013 3:15:00 PM (view original):
Yea, if we allow polygamous marriages, we'll have to allow toaster marriage.  And then self-marriage. And marrying oak trees.
I think we're still working with "consenting adults".    Unless you don't think bisexuals can possibly have the brainpower to consent.   Is that your contention?
4/4/2013 3:17 PM
Why do we have to work on consenting adults? We're already changing the definition of "2 people" to "as many people as you ******* want."  Why not toasters?
4/4/2013 3:17 PM
Great. So allow polygamy. What's the problem with that?
4/4/2013 3:18 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/4/2013 3:17:00 PM (view original):
Why do we have to work on consenting adults? We're already changing the definition of "2 people" to "as many people as you ******* want."  Why not toasters?
We don't have to.   Is it your contention that toasters and bisexuals are interchangeable in our society?
4/4/2013 3:21 PM
No, but people who want to marry multiple people and people who fall in love with toasters are interchangeable.  For the sake of equality.  Let's call it marriage!  We can celebrate by eating toast at the wedding.
4/4/2013 3:25 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/4/2013 3:21:00 PM (view original):
No, but people who want to marry multiple people and people who fall in love with toasters are interchangeable.  For the sake of equality.  Let's call it marriage!  We can celebrate by eating toast at the wedding.
Nice.  We've tossed "consenting adults" from the marriage equation.

Pedophiles across the nation rejoice!!!  Now they can screw 5 y/o boys legally!!!!



See what happens when you don't think things out?
4/4/2013 3:30 PM
Yes. Don't change the definition of anything, ever, because you might end up thinking you bought a "car" but instead the definition of car may allow for the car to become an 80s-style cartoon transformer that will end mankind once you start it.
4/4/2013 3:34 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/4/2013 3:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/4/2013 3:21:00 PM (view original):
No, but people who want to marry multiple people and people who fall in love with toasters are interchangeable.  For the sake of equality.  Let's call it marriage!  We can celebrate by eating toast at the wedding.
Nice.  We've tossed "consenting adults" from the marriage equation.

Pedophiles across the nation rejoice!!!  Now they can screw 5 y/o boys legally!!!!



See what happens when you don't think things out?
Yes, this isn't quite marriage now, is it?  Even for the sake of equality.  (I'm attracted to children.  Why can't a marry a child! I'm an equal!)  We can't change EVERYTHING someone may want in the definition of something, or else it loses the meaning in the first place, and could become dangerous.  So where is the line?  

I think we can move the line to include homosexuals when it comes to marriage - it does no bad.  Include polygamists and it starts to get hazy, but I suppose we can allow it.  This makes you uncomfortable, and I understand that.  But we're grown-ups and we can make grown-up decisions.  Can we allow things/people that aren't consenting adults?  No.  There's a line there.  

4/4/2013 3:44 PM
Boom
4/4/2013 3:51 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/4/2013 3:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/4/2013 3:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/4/2013 3:21:00 PM (view original):
No, but people who want to marry multiple people and people who fall in love with toasters are interchangeable.  For the sake of equality.  Let's call it marriage!  We can celebrate by eating toast at the wedding.
Nice.  We've tossed "consenting adults" from the marriage equation.

Pedophiles across the nation rejoice!!!  Now they can screw 5 y/o boys legally!!!!



See what happens when you don't think things out?
Yes, this isn't quite marriage now, is it?  Even for the sake of equality.  (I'm attracted to children.  Why can't a marry a child! I'm an equal!)  We can't change EVERYTHING someone may want in the definition of something, or else it loses the meaning in the first place, and could become dangerous.  So where is the line?  

I think we can move the line to include homosexuals when it comes to marriage - it does no bad.  Include polygamists and it starts to get hazy, but I suppose we can allow it.  This makes you uncomfortable, and I understand that.  But we're grown-ups and we can make grown-up decisions.  Can we allow things/people that aren't consenting adults?  No.  There's a line there.  

I wasn't condoning the tossing out of "consenting adults" from the definition of marriage.   That sort of falls in your lap.    I assume because you were attempting to respond quickly and without thought. 

I don't think we can move the line to include homosexuals without considering IF that line could be dangerous.   You went from SSM to toaster marriage to marrying 5 y/o boys in a matter of minutes.    I prefer to move a little slower and a lot more carefully.

I'd argue that my way is a lot more safer for the US.    And I'll accept that there are homosexual couples who aren't happy that they may have to wait another day to tie the knot.   They'll be alright. 
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.