Redefining Marriage and all that

[Sunstone]

This thread is split off of another thread. The topic of this thread is something along the lines of Redefining Marriage.

 

[Fluffy]

Isn't there some sort of law against such debauchery? I think you will find that, it being a religious concept, marriage is defined to be between one man and one woman from one faith. They also must have the same shoe size and a similar tone of hair, eye and skin colouring.

 

[sandandfoam]

Isn't there some sort of law against such debauchery? I think you will find that, it being a religious concept, marriage is defined to be between one man and one woman from one faith. They also must have the same shoe size and a similar tone of hair, eye and skin colouring.

Siblings are probably best so. :no:

 

[McBell]

Isn't there some sort of law against such debauchery? I think you will find that, it being a religious concept, marriage is defined to be between one man and one woman from one faith. They also must have the same shoe size and a similar tone of hair, eye and skin colouring.

Please do not give them any ideas.
They have already tried redefining the word marriage to fit their anti same sex agenda and not all that long ago they tried redefining marriage to exclude mixed race couples.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Please do not give them any ideas.
They have already tried redefining the word marriage to fit their anti same sex agenda and not all that long ago they tried redefining marriage to exclude mixed race couples.

Who is they and them?

 

[McBell]

Who is they and them?

Those against same sex marriage and those against inter-racial marriage.

Though I thought that was made clear in the original post.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Those against same sex marriage and those against inter-racial marriage.

Though I thought that was made clear in the original post.

Do you believe these folks you speak of subscribe to both opinions?

 

[McBell]

Do you believe these folks you speak of subscribe to both opinions?

I suspect that some do and that some do not subscribe to both opinions.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I suspect that some do and that some do not subscribe to both opinions.

Why lump them all together then?

 

[McBell]

Why lump them all together then?

Because it is the same umbrella lump that redefined the term.

Those who are redefining marriage now are using the same "source of reasoning" as those who tried redefining the word marriage back then.

 

[Yerda]

Why lump them all together then?

Might as well keep yer bigots in one basket.

 

[McBell]

Might as well keep yer bigots in one basket.

That too

 

[Reverend Rick]

Might as well keep yer bigots in one basket.

Calling folks bigots and lumping them together is being no different than the folks you are railing against.

Wanting to remove one group of people's rights to give another group their rights is just as bigoted.

Why can't everyone have rights and let the system go through it's natural process? The same system gave women and blacks their rights, why would not the same system give any other group their rights as well?

 

[McBell]

Wanting to remove one group of people's rights to give another group their rights is just as bigoted.

What rights, and from whom, were taken away when inter-racial marriage was made legal?

 

[Reverend Rick]

What rights, and from whom, were taken away when inter-racial marriage was made legal?

None that I know of. Why should we demonise any group of people? The system works. There is no need to single any group out or pick and choose who has power when you believe in the system that has delivered time and time again.

 

[McBell]

None that I know of. Why should we demonise any group of people? The system works. There is no need to single any group out or pick and choose who has power when you believe in the system that has delivered time and time again.

what are you talking about?
I am talking about the redefining of the word marriage yet again.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I am talking about the redefining of the word marriage yet again.

And demonising a group of folks you disagree with and labeling them as bigots.

The challenge that has not been met is, women are born women and blacks were born blacks. They could not hide their status or change their status.

To compare same sex relationships with interracial relationships is apples and oranges and the people who were against interracial relationships were indeed bigots. To lump them with folks who oppose same sex marriage is a stretch.

Is anyone who holds a difference of opinion a bigot?

 

[McBell]

And demonising a group of folks you disagree with and labeling them as bigots.

What group are you claiming I am demonizing?

The challenge that has not been met is, women are born women and blacks were born blacks. They could not hide their status or change their status.

And homosexuals are born homosexual.
What is your point?

To compare same sex relationships with interracial relationships is apples and oranges and the people who were against interracial relationships were indeed bigots. To lump them with folks who oppose same sex marriage is a stretch.

Not when the EXACT SAME arguments that were used against inter-racial marriage are being used against same sex couples getting married.

Is anyone who holds a difference of opinion a bigot?

Nope.
Only those who discriminate others based on the difference of opinion.

 

[Reverend Rick]

What group are you claiming I am demonizing?

The "They" and "them" you refer to like they are an all inclusive group of bigots.

And homosexuals are born homosexual.
What is your point?

Perhaps many, but not all. Are you saying a person could not change their sexuality?

Not when the EXACT SAME arguments that were used against inter-racial marriage are being used against same sex couples getting married.

And these exact same arguments failed with inter-racial relationships. Why would they not fail again?

Nope.
Only those who discriminate others based on the difference of opinion.

Are you saying you don't discriminate when you want to put some people in one basket?

 

[McBell]

The "They" and "them" you refer to like they are an all inclusive group of bigots.

They're not?

Perhaps many, but not all. Are you saying a person could not change their sexuality?

Are you saying they can?
There are several people who change their sex from male to female or female to male.

So either way the point is moot.

And these exact same arguments failed with inter-racial relationships. Why would they not fail again?

Never said or thought they would.

Are you saying you don't discriminate when you want to put some people in one basket?

If the shoe fits, put it on.