You can respond precisely to what others are saying by using 1/11 of the words, as I did earlier.
I can respond the way I choose, and you can respond the way you choose.
Also, as I said earlier, I'm not arguing this topic with you anymore. Just making the point that you're insanely verbose.
So you're not longer arguing the actual point of discussion, just making excuses as to why you couldn't get the job done. Got it.
And I'd argue that you're doing it as a strategy to "win" an argument. You've posted several things in conversation with me to which my response was essentially "Yea, you told me all that before, but that doesn't show any evidence/answer my question to you." You're essentially a politician in a debate. Answer a question, but not actually say anything while you're doing it.
No, I answer you directly every time. Just because I didn't answer in the way you would prefer doesn't mean I didn't answer at all.
As for any reasonable form of "winning" the actual debate we once had, I've accomplished that long ago. Unless you or someone else presents some kind of new challenge to my argument supported by logical reasoning, then nothing has changed in regards to that.
Allowing gay marriage changes none of that. Straight people will still marry (or not) and have kids. Gay people may or may not marry and will still be incapable of having their own biological children.
I believe the point was that gay marriage is unnecessary, not that it wouldn't change anything. Nice try, though.
This is bistiza's argument, in a nutshell:
Bis: "Sexuality is not based on attraction, it's based on your choices."
everyone else: we disagree
Bis: "Sorry, the argument that sexuality is based on attraction has been debunked."
You need to go back and read the thread, dahs, because that's NOT the argument. The argument you're making WAS debunked by me, but not because I say so - because I actually did it, many pages ago in this very thread.
Seriously, if you weren't around for pertinent discussion, go back and read it before you pretend you know what's going on when you clearly don't.
Yep. Just like his "argument" on the age of the earth.
Seriously? You were here and a part of the discussion and you don't remember it? You even attempted to make several points which I quickly debunked, including the famous statement "you are what you say you are", to which I told you criminals should all be set free if they claim they are innocent and I am the billionaire batpope because I say I am.
Ring any bells? Because you were soundly beaten in those arguments, but its convenient for you to forget all about that now.