6/19/2013 12:42 PM
Yet there are laws that tell people how to live their lives.

What would happen to you if you decided to embrace nudity, and walked down Main Street in your town at 12pm tomorrow afternoon wearing nothing but your birthday suit?

Who's getting hurt by your being naked in public?  What's the harm?  Who's the boss of you?  Who the **** is anybody else to tell you that you can't do that?
6/19/2013 12:56 PM
Everybody is subject to the same law there. It does not discriminate.
6/19/2013 12:57 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/19/2013 12:42:00 PM (view original):
Yet there are laws that tell people how to live their lives.

What would happen to you if you decided to embrace nudity, and walked down Main Street in your town at 12pm tomorrow afternoon wearing nothing but your birthday suit?

Who's getting hurt by your being naked in public?  What's the harm?  Who's the boss of you?  Who the **** is anybody else to tell you that you can't do that?
What taint said. The law applies equally.

Also, I wouldn't be against allowing nudity. It's only a big deal because we make it a big deal.
6/19/2013 1:35 PM
Posted by The Taint on 6/19/2013 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Everybody is subject to the same law there. It does not discriminate.
Neither does marriage, when one understands the connotation of what a marriage is.

Let's say I have an apple pie.  You come along and say, "I'd like to have a piece of that apple pie, but I want blueberries and not apples in mine".  I tell you "Sounds like what you want is a piece of blueberry pie.  It's over there.'  You say "I don't want that pie.  I want apple pie, but with blueberries instead of apples."

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?

But that's what the argument of same-sex "marriage" (versus civil union) is all about.  Wanting to change the definition of something very specific to also include something that it is not.
6/19/2013 1:45 PM
Can't believe I'm posting in here again.

Directed towards tec.  Aside from the obvious, do you see a significant difference between a loving relationship between 2 people of the opposite sex and 2 people of the same sex?
6/19/2013 1:57 PM
Explain to me what you mean by "the obvious".  Because that's a little generic and can cover a lot of things.
6/19/2013 2:02 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/19/2013 1:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 6/19/2013 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Everybody is subject to the same law there. It does not discriminate.
Neither does marriage, when one understands the connotation of what a marriage is.

Let's say I have an apple pie.  You come along and say, "I'd like to have a piece of that apple pie, but I want blueberries and not apples in mine".  I tell you "Sounds like what you want is a piece of blueberry pie.  It's over there.'  You say "I don't want that pie.  I want apple pie, but with blueberries instead of apples."

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?

But that's what the argument of same-sex "marriage" (versus civil union) is all about.  Wanting to change the definition of something very specific to also include something that it is not.
Yet marriage already includes gay couples.

Correcting your analogy:

A store sells pies. For years the store, which you do not own, only sold apple pies. You think apple pie is the only valid pie and any other types of pie go against pie tradition. One day someone comes in and asks for blueberry pie. The shop owner agrees to make and sell blueberry pies in addition to apple pies. You freak the **** out and try to get the baker to stop selling blueberry pies because they offend your tradition.
6/19/2013 2:05 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/19/2013 1:57:00 PM (view original):
Explain to me what you mean by "the obvious".  Because that's a little generic and can cover a lot of things.
The fact that one is a heterosexual relationship and one is a homosexual relationship.
6/19/2013 2:12 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 6/19/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/19/2013 1:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 6/19/2013 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Everybody is subject to the same law there. It does not discriminate.
Neither does marriage, when one understands the connotation of what a marriage is.

Let's say I have an apple pie.  You come along and say, "I'd like to have a piece of that apple pie, but I want blueberries and not apples in mine".  I tell you "Sounds like what you want is a piece of blueberry pie.  It's over there.'  You say "I don't want that pie.  I want apple pie, but with blueberries instead of apples."

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?

But that's what the argument of same-sex "marriage" (versus civil union) is all about.  Wanting to change the definition of something very specific to also include something that it is not.
Yet marriage already includes gay couples.

Correcting your analogy:

A store sells pies. For years the store, which you do not own, only sold apple pies. You think apple pie is the only valid pie and any other types of pie go against pie tradition. One day someone comes in and asks for blueberry pie. The shop owner agrees to make and sell blueberry pies in addition to apple pies. You freak the **** out and try to get the baker to stop selling blueberry pies because they offend your tradition.
Correction: bastardized definitions of marriage include gay couples.

Your "correction" to my analogy is not my analogy.  It's something different.
6/19/2013 2:15 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/19/2013 1:45:00 PM (view original):
Can't believe I'm posting in here again.

Directed towards tec.  Aside from the obvious, do you see a significant difference between a loving relationship between 2 people of the opposite sex and 2 people of the same sex?
OK.  I assume you are talking about a legally formalized and recognized relationship.  Correct me if I'm wrong.

The only difference I see is that one (opposite sex) would be a traditional marriage, and the other (same sex) would be a civil union.  Similar things, different connotations.
6/19/2013 2:17 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/19/2013 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 6/19/2013 2:02:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/19/2013 1:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by The Taint on 6/19/2013 12:56:00 PM (view original):
Everybody is subject to the same law there. It does not discriminate.
Neither does marriage, when one understands the connotation of what a marriage is.

Let's say I have an apple pie.  You come along and say, "I'd like to have a piece of that apple pie, but I want blueberries and not apples in mine".  I tell you "Sounds like what you want is a piece of blueberry pie.  It's over there.'  You say "I don't want that pie.  I want apple pie, but with blueberries instead of apples."

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense, does it?

But that's what the argument of same-sex "marriage" (versus civil union) is all about.  Wanting to change the definition of something very specific to also include something that it is not.
Yet marriage already includes gay couples.

Correcting your analogy:

A store sells pies. For years the store, which you do not own, only sold apple pies. You think apple pie is the only valid pie and any other types of pie go against pie tradition. One day someone comes in and asks for blueberry pie. The shop owner agrees to make and sell blueberry pies in addition to apple pies. You freak the **** out and try to get the baker to stop selling blueberry pies because they offend your tradition.
Correction: bastardized definitions of marriage include gay couples.

Your "correction" to my analogy is not my analogy.  It's something different.
No, your analogy was horrible. It needed a revision. No one is changing/taking from your pie. Your pie is still apple and you don't have to share it. They want their own pie. It's none of your business what flavor it is.
6/19/2013 2:17 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 6/19/2013 2:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 6/19/2013 1:45:00 PM (view original):
Can't believe I'm posting in here again.

Directed towards tec.  Aside from the obvious, do you see a significant difference between a loving relationship between 2 people of the opposite sex and 2 people of the same sex?
OK.  I assume you are talking about a legally formalized and recognized relationship.  Correct me if I'm wrong.

The only difference I see is that one (opposite sex) would be a traditional marriage, and the other (same sex) would be a civil union.  Similar things, different connotations.
Not what I mean.  Take the marriage out of it for now.  Is there a significant difference between a loving, healthy heterosexual relationship and a loving, healthy homosexual relationship?  Aside from the fact that one is homosexual and the other is heterosexual?
6/19/2013 2:36 PM
Is it possible that some people think that's enough to make it a significant difference?

Is there any significant difference between an apple and a tiger?   Aside from one being a fruit and the other being an animal?
6/19/2013 2:39 PM
Or, to reference tec's pie analogy, Is there any significant difference between an apple pie and a blueberry pie?   Aside from one being made with apples and the other being made with blueberries?
6/19/2013 2:47 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/19/2013 2:39:00 PM (view original):
Or, to reference tec's pie analogy, Is there any significant difference between an apple pie and a blueberry pie?   Aside from one being made with apples and the other being made with blueberries?
Nope, they are both still pie. Fruit/sugar filled pastries baked in an oven.
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.