5/7/2013 8:39 AM
Let's just let whoever marry whoever (or whatever) they want. You can marry your dog, cat, horse, cousin, child, or a piece of pie if  you want.

In fact, let's just let everyone do whatever the **** they want to do all the time.

Then no one can whine that their rights are somehow being violated, and the ACLU will have nothing to do because they can't help people whine about rights being violated.
5/7/2013 8:40 AM
You do understand why some people see man/man as opposed to man/woman as more than a "small difference", right?
5/7/2013 8:56 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 8:40:00 AM (view original):
You do understand why some people see man/man as opposed to man/woman as more than a "small difference", right?
Yes.  I said I understand.  Just disagree.  As in "Do you understand why some people see men voting as opposed to women voting is more than a small difference".  They're still people.  And as I said, I know I'm not changing anyone's minds here.  Tec just set me off a little last night when he referred to gay marriage as "new and trendy" like it was bell-bottoms in the 70s or something.
5/7/2013 9:00 AM

As I said, different situations call for different reactions. 

I don't think anyone has argued against civil unions where SS couples are granted all the same rights and privileges as "married" couples.   To me, that's a pretty big compromise.   However, for whatever reason, that doesn't seem good enough.    It's a different situation and a different term is being used to describe their union. 

Do you know why "civil union" is not good enough?

5/7/2013 9:04 AM
Getting the same rights and privileges for civil unions would be a huge step, and I appreciate that nobody here has seemed to argue against that.

And yes, we discussed why "civil union" isn't good enough.  I remember you thinking I was ridiculous and using caps lock a lot.
5/7/2013 9:05 AM
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/7/2013 8:56:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 8:40:00 AM (view original):
You do understand why some people see man/man as opposed to man/woman as more than a "small difference", right?
Yes.  I said I understand.  Just disagree.  As in "Do you understand why some people see men voting as opposed to women voting is more than a small difference".  They're still people.  And as I said, I know I'm not changing anyone's minds here.  Tec just set me off a little last night when he referred to gay marriage as "new and trendy" like it was bell-bottoms in the 70s or something.
The drive towards mainstream acceptance is "new and trendy".  You can't possibly deny that.

We shouldn't make fundamantal changes to long-standing traditions on a whim.

And since we all seem to "agree to disagree", can't we all just STFU about this?  Though I know it's impossible for bad_luck to not come back with his obligatory "It doesn't hurt anybody, why not allow it?" post to keep this thread going.
5/7/2013 9:07 AM
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/7/2013 9:04:00 AM (view original):
Getting the same rights and privileges for civil unions would be a huge step, and I appreciate that nobody here has seemed to argue against that.

And yes, we discussed why "civil union" isn't good enough.  I remember you thinking I was ridiculous and using caps lock a lot.
Yeah, I probably did.   Humor me.   Tell me why it HAS to be called "marriage" when you're getting everything you want sans the term.
5/7/2013 9:11 AM
Posted by tecwrg on 5/7/2013 9:05:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/7/2013 8:56:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 8:40:00 AM (view original):
You do understand why some people see man/man as opposed to man/woman as more than a "small difference", right?
Yes.  I said I understand.  Just disagree.  As in "Do you understand why some people see men voting as opposed to women voting is more than a small difference".  They're still people.  And as I said, I know I'm not changing anyone's minds here.  Tec just set me off a little last night when he referred to gay marriage as "new and trendy" like it was bell-bottoms in the 70s or something.
The drive towards mainstream acceptance is "new and trendy".  You can't possibly deny that.

We shouldn't make fundamantal changes to long-standing traditions on a whim.

And since we all seem to "agree to disagree", can't we all just STFU about this?  Though I know it's impossible for bad_luck to not come back with his obligatory "It doesn't hurt anybody, why not allow it?" post to keep this thread going.
I had a problem with the word "trendy" which is why I bounced back in here.  I thought it was kinda disrespectful.  It generally describes fashion.  As in, the fight for gay rights is a fad that will fade away.  That's all.

And I understand that you're all for gay rights, up until calling it marriage. 
5/7/2013 9:12 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 9:07:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 5/7/2013 9:04:00 AM (view original):
Getting the same rights and privileges for civil unions would be a huge step, and I appreciate that nobody here has seemed to argue against that.

And yes, we discussed why "civil union" isn't good enough.  I remember you thinking I was ridiculous and using caps lock a lot.
Yeah, I probably did.   Humor me.   Tell me why it HAS to be called "marriage" when you're getting everything you want sans the term.
I don't feel like it.  It was several pages worth of argument, you can find it if you really want to.
5/7/2013 9:14 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 8:40:00 AM (view original):
You do understand why some people see man/man as opposed to man/woman as more than a "small difference", right?
In the context of marriage, why does that difference matter?
5/7/2013 9:16 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 9:00:00 AM (view original):

As I said, different situations call for different reactions. 

I don't think anyone has argued against civil unions where SS couples are granted all the same rights and privileges as "married" couples.   To me, that's a pretty big compromise.   However, for whatever reason, that doesn't seem good enough.    It's a different situation and a different term is being used to describe their union. 

Do you know why "civil union" is not good enough?

Because it isn't the same thing legally.
5/7/2013 9:16 AM
Yeah, I'll dig thru that.

I compare it to this:  You walk into an eatery and order a "Hamburger and fries".   They say "We call it a Beefburger and Spuds but it's the same thing."   You throw a fit and eventually walk out.    Make sense? 
5/7/2013 9:18 AM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/7/2013 9:16:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 9:00:00 AM (view original):

As I said, different situations call for different reactions. 

I don't think anyone has argued against civil unions where SS couples are granted all the same rights and privileges as "married" couples.   To me, that's a pretty big compromise.   However, for whatever reason, that doesn't seem good enough.    It's a different situation and a different term is being used to describe their union. 

Do you know why "civil union" is not good enough?

Because it isn't the same thing legally.
And if it was?
5/7/2013 9:18 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 9:16:00 AM (view original):
Yeah, I'll dig thru that.

I compare it to this:  You walk into an eatery and order a "Hamburger and fries".   They say "We call it a Beefburger and Spuds but it's the same thing."   You throw a fit and eventually walk out.    Make sense? 
? I didn't say the name the name was different. I said it isn't the same thing legally. The rights and privileges granted to married couples are different than the rights granted to civil unions.
5/7/2013 9:19 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2013 9:16:00 AM (view original):
Yeah, I'll dig thru that.

I compare it to this:  You walk into an eatery and order a "Hamburger and fries".   They say "We call it a Beefburger and Spuds but it's the same thing."   You throw a fit and eventually walk out.    Make sense? 
Yes, I get your argument.  Except when it gets spun as "yea, it's the same thing, so call it a hamburger and fries and make the gay community happy" there's major resistance.  Which means it isn't the same thing.
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.