No, you edited your post. There was no question mark when you originally posted.

Yes, and I'm also the batpope, remember? You must have read the post incorrectly - what a shock.

No. I try to keep things on topic.

This IS on topic.

I'm saying that you don't care about getting rid of just any old "stupid, discriminatory laws" - you ONLY care about forwarding the homosexual agenda. I'm giving you a chance to show me that I'm wrong. So go ahead - show me I'm wrong. I'm waiting.

I care about this law. Give me an example of another unfairly discriminatory law and I'll tell you if its something I care about or not.

Why do you care SO MUCH about this law?

I care about this law. Give me an example of another unfairly discriminatory law and I'll tell you if its something I care about or not.

 

All I'm asking for is some examples (****, even ONE example might be pushing it for you) of ANY "stupid, discriminatory laws" you would like to see changed that don't somehow benefit the homosexual agenda. This shouldn't be a difficult thing for you to provide if there are, in fact, such laws you want changed.

It's not my job to list laws and hope they meet your definition of "stupid, discriminatory laws" and then you can pick the ones you may care about (if any, which I doubt).

It's on you to provide your own examples - if you can.  Your dancing around this question seems to indicate you can't.

Posted by bistiza on 6/13/2013 2:47:00 PM (view original):

I care about this law. Give me an example of another unfairly discriminatory law and I'll tell you if its something I care about or not.

 

All I'm asking for is some examples (****, even ONE example might be pushing it for you) of ANY "stupid, discriminatory laws" you would like to see changed that don't somehow benefit the homosexual agenda. This shouldn't be a difficult thing for you to provide if there are, in fact, such laws you want changed.

It's not my job to list laws and hope they meet your definition of "stupid, discriminatory laws" and then you can pick the ones you may care about (if any, which I doubt).

It's on you to provide your own examples - if you can.  Your dancing around this question seems to indicate you can't.

It's not on me to do anything. I'm not even sure what exactly your question is.

Posted by tecwrg on 6/13/2013 2:37:00 PM (view original):
Why do you care SO MUCH about this law?

It strikes a chord with me. We prohibit a group of people from doing something that everyone else can. And we prohibit it primarily because we don't like them. 

It's not on me to do anything. I'm not even sure what exactly your question is.

I'm saying you ONLY care about the homosexual agenda, not about issues of "stupid, discriminatory laws" in general, as you suggested.

If I'm wrong, show me examples of "stupid, discriminatory laws" you care about that do not have anything to do with the homosexual agenda. Stop dancing around this and either do it or admit you can't.

It strikes a chord with me. We prohibit a group of people from doing something that everyone else can. And we prohibit it primarily because we don't like them.

Except we're not prohibiting anyone from doing anything other people can do.

Everyone - whether they are heterosexual or homosexual - can marry someone of the opposite gender.

I disagree with your premise. It has nothing to do with the homosexual agenda.

Posted by bistiza on 6/13/2013 3:17:00 PM (view original):

It strikes a chord with me. We prohibit a group of people from doing something that everyone else can. And we prohibit it primarily because we don't like them.

Except we're not prohibiting anyone from doing anything other people can do.

Everyone - whether they are heterosexual or homosexual - can marry someone of the opposite gender.

Everyone - whether they are black or white - can marry someone of the same race.

I disagree with your premise. It has nothing to do with the homosexual agenda.

So prove it - give me an example of a "stupid, discriminatory law" you want to see changed that doesn't have anything to do with sexuality at all.

Laws that prevent felons from voting after they have completed their prison sentences and are no longer on parole or probation.

Are we done here?

Everyone - whether they are black or white - can marry someone of the same race.

We've already been over this - race is determined by biology, and sexuality is determined by choice. 

What you're trying to do is the same as comparing height to getting a DUI - one involves a biological factor, the other involves an active choice.

In case you aren't aware (and I'm sure you're not), that means you can't compare the two things accurately. There goes that entire argument, but knowing how stubborn you are, I'm sure it will continue anyway (though not with me because I've already shown it to be illogical).

Are we done here?

When you stop trying to argue by comparing biological traits with choices, we might be.