And so am I ....and the people who are against gay marriage. Why should we have our wallets impacted? No benefit to us. SO why vote for it.
Your wallet is an inanimate object and therefore has no rights. Tell me how your PERSONHOOD is impacted, not your wallet.
Becasue when my wallet is impacted my livelihood or personhood is impacted. My life is far better with $800 dollars in my wallet than with $600 in my wallet. I can buy more things for myself and the people I care about. I also have more money to donate to charities of which I choose if I want.
And so am I ....and the people who are against gay marriage. Why should we have our wallets impacted? No benefit to us. SO why vote for it.
Your wallet is an inanimate object and therefore has no rights. Tell me how your PERSONHOOD is impacted, not your wallet.
Becasue when my wallet is impacted my livelihood or personhood is impacted. My life is far better with $800 dollars in my wallet than with $600 in my wallet. I can buy more things for myself and the people I care about. I also have more money to donate to charities of which I choose if I want.
So it doesn't impact your personhood. I didn't think so.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
Slavery ran it's course cut and dried. The country needed skilled labor, not unskilled labor.
Not really true. Our country has always needed and used unskilled labor. Who do you think picks all the vegetables we grow for well below minimum wage? Who builds our houses?
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
Considering the definition of the actual meaning of the word personhood is controversial, I would like to hear what you define personhood as being and then I can tell you if it impacts me based on your definition. :corn:
Slavery ran it's course cut and dried. The country needed skilled labor, not unskilled labor.
Not really true. Our country has always needed and used unskilled labor. Who do you think picks all the vegetables we grow for well below minimum wage? Who builds our houses?
Slavery was at its peak in 1860 and was being expanded into the new territories. It was destroyed with military force and by constitutional amendment. History FAIL. Try again.
Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13; Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22; Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
Considering the definition of the actual meaning of the word personhood is controversial, I would like to hear what you define personhood as being and then I can tell you if it impacts me based on your definition. :corn:
I'm not talking about the controversial aspect of it when it comes to abortion rights. Save that for another thread.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
Slavery was at its peak in 1860 and was being expanded into the new territories. It was destroyed with military force and by constitutional amendment. History FAIL. Try again.
And you failed to mention the lack of need for slave labor in the northern states along with the southern dependance on it...also you failed to mention the other power struggles going on between the norhtern and southern states at the time. It was a huge chess match and the slavery issue was just a pawn in the giant game.
Considering the definition of the actual meaning of the word personhood is controversial, I would like to hear what you define personhood as being and then I can tell you if it impacts me based on your definition. :corn:
I'm not talking about the controversial aspect of it when it comes to abortion rights. Save that for another thread.
So give me your definition of it so I can c :corn: omment.
Pro gay marriage has nothing to do with equality, it's all about economics and money.
:fp:
This sentence alone represents an inability to comprehend the subject, and this debate will, not surprisingly, go absolutely nowhere. Ever. But it is comical and sad at the same time.
I think I know who would be pushing, like George Costanza, to get out of a crowded room in a fire.
So you're saying slavery can be acceptable? A simple yes or no. You can do it big guy.
How do you feel? Do you like this country? :corn:
I love most things about this country. I love where I live, I love my family, I love that I am able to make the living that I do, I love the sports. I love the freedom of speech and especially the press. I could go on and on.
I don't like the inequality, I don't like the bigotry, I don't like that our government can't accomplish a damn thing without arguing like 4 year olds. I don't like that there are so many in this country that don't give a shit about the environment. I could go on and on about this as well.
It's a great place with a lot of faults.
None of that has anything to do with slavery. Now answer the question. Can slavery be acceptable?
And we now see the absurd lengths to which the "supporting traditional marriage" crowd will go to to avoid having to say "because I think what you guys do is icky."
We all have a voice in this country and let evryone;s be heard...but the majority will and always has ruled.
You mean like how Bush didnt get the majority of the popular votes in 2000?
First point...just brutally honest.
Second point...you don't like the system get it changed. That's the beautiful thing with the AMerican system is you may have a fight, but it can and has changed.
I was just pointing out that even in the most extreme cases, the majority doesnt always rule. Now, in the case of gay marriage and equality, I think they are making progress, even as a extreme minority. Hold onto your panties too, I'll bet that in the near future, gay marriage will be universally accepted by law, and the minority will have won.
Becasue when my wallet is impacted my livelihood or personhood is impacted. My life is far better with $800 dollars in my wallet than with $600 in my wallet. I can buy more things for myself and the people I care about. I also have more money to donate to charities of which I choose if I want.
So give me your definition of it so I can c :corn: omment.
I'm not engaging in another bout of circular reasoning with you. If you can't answer the question the first time, I'll accept that you don't have an answer. Thanks for playing :wave:
Less than 5% of the population has green eyes. Why don't we just deny them these rights and benefit your wallet that way? You're born with eye color just as you're born LGBT.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
So you're saying slavery can be acceptable? A simple yes or no. You can do it big guy.
How do you feel? Do you like this country? :corn:
I love most things about this country. I love where I live, I love my family, I love that I am able to make the living that I do, I love the sports. I love the freedom of speech and especially the press. I could go on and on.
I don't like the inequality, I don't like the bigotry, I don't like that our government can't accomplish a damn thing without arguing like 4 year olds. I don't like that there are so many in this country that don't give a shit about the environment. I could go on and on about this as well.
It's a great place with a lot of faults.
None of that has anything to do with slavery. Now answer the question. Can slavery be acceptable?
Can any great country or power be built without slavery? History proves otherwise. :corn:
Man+Man, Woman+Woman, is not the equivalent to Man+Woman.
I never understood the "equality" issue here. You can't force genders to be equal. They are biological.
Moreover, I have no idea why granting gays the right to "unite" instead of "marry", wouldn't solve the issue. Keep the word that meant one definition for 1000s of years (make one side happy), and give gays the rights they want so badly (other side happy). Because it is rights they want, right? Not the word "marriage"?
Hmmm...
Not so sure about that. If they want marriage - then I think the issue is more fishy because it seems to me they want a public form of approval on their form of relationship. And there is no way that will ever really happen. There will always be some who disapprove - and that's their right. Just take the civil union, realize your relationship is biologically different - so a different word is fine, and that solves that.
Regardless, government shouldn't be involved in any marriage. If they are, there should be a good reason. I can see why a government that propped up ponzi schemes would need youth. So, one reasonable argument I never understood the anti-gay marriage crowd doesn't use is "future taxpayers". By definition, gay couples can't procreate and create new taxpayers. Some would respond, well some couples can't either. True. But, the government doesn't know that. They know heterocouples have the possibility to do such.
Even that argument though is bogus. Government shouldn't be involved in marriage - period, financial or not. If gov't was out. That would solve this issue entirely. And leave us to discuss real issues.
I come in here and read nonsense from both sides. You're all crazy.
So give me your definition of it so I can c :corn: omment.
I'm not engaging in another bout of circular reasoning with you. If you can't answer the question the first time, I'll accept that you don't have an answer. Thanks for playing :wave:
Less than 5% of the population has green eyes. Why don't we just deny them these rights and benefit your wallet that way? You're born with eye color just as you're born LGBT.
You're asking me a question to a word that has a very broad definition. It's liking asking me if I like the color red. There are 100's of shades of red. Define the word and I will answer appropriately.
And to address your second point concerning the green eyed analogy...there are a lot of people who feel you weren't born LGBT and that it's a choice. I feel no need to comment how I feel becasue it's irrelevant...I'm just pointing that out.
And we now see the absurd lengths to which the "supporting traditional marriage" crowd will go to to avoid having to say "because I think what you guys do is icky."
Hey, that's not fair. I support gay marriage AND I'm proud to admit that I think what you guys do is icky!!!
So give me your definition of it so I can c :corn: omment.
I'm not engaging in another bout of circular reasoning with you. If you can't answer the question the first time, I'll accept that you don't have an answer. Thanks for playing :wave:
Less than 5% of the population has green eyes. Why don't we just deny them these rights and benefit your wallet that way? You're born with eye color just as you're born LGBT.
You're asking me a question to a word that has a very broad definition. It's liking asking me if I like the color red. There are 100's of shades of red. Define the word and I will answer appropriately.
Unreal. Stop dancing around it. We're going on 3 pages. Let's use the first sentence of Wikipedia which about sums it up
Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work
Comments
Slavery ran it's course cut and dried. The country needed skilled labor, not unskilled labor.
So owning slaves is moral and okay to you if the country needs it?
Becasue when my wallet is impacted my livelihood or personhood is impacted. My life is far better with $800 dollars in my wallet than with $600 in my wallet. I can buy more things for myself and the people I care about. I also have more money to donate to charities of which I choose if I want.
The US certainly didn't invent it.
So if the country could use slavery, it is okay? I didn't ask who invented it, I asked if it was okay to you, which you already implied.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
This great country and many others were built on slavery correct?
So you're saying slavery can be acceptable? A simple yes or no. You can do it big guy.
Not really true. Our country has always needed and used unskilled labor. Who do you think picks all the vegetables we grow for well below minimum wage? Who builds our houses?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personhood
Considering the definition of the actual meaning of the word personhood is controversial, I would like to hear what you define personhood as being and then I can tell you if it impacts me based on your definition. :corn:
How do you feel? Do you like this country? :corn:
But to answer your question, no great society has ever been built without slavery.
Slavery was at its peak in 1860 and was being expanded into the new territories. It was destroyed with military force and by constitutional amendment. History FAIL. Try again.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
And you failed to mention the lack of need for slave labor in the northern states along with the southern dependance on it...also you failed to mention the other power struggles going on between the norhtern and southern states at the time. It was a huge chess match and the slavery issue was just a pawn in the giant game.
So give me your definition of it so I can c :corn: omment.
:fp:
This sentence alone represents an inability to comprehend the subject, and this debate will, not surprisingly, go absolutely nowhere. Ever. But it is comical and sad at the same time.
I think I know who would be pushing, like George Costanza, to get out of a crowded room in a fire.
I love most things about this country. I love where I live, I love my family, I love that I am able to make the living that I do, I love the sports. I love the freedom of speech and especially the press. I could go on and on.
I don't like the inequality, I don't like the bigotry, I don't like that our government can't accomplish a damn thing without arguing like 4 year olds. I don't like that there are so many in this country that don't give a shit about the environment. I could go on and on about this as well.
It's a great place with a lot of faults.
None of that has anything to do with slavery. Now answer the question. Can slavery be acceptable?
I was just pointing out that even in the most extreme cases, the majority doesnt always rule. Now, in the case of gay marriage and equality, I think they are making progress, even as a extreme minority. Hold onto your panties too, I'll bet that in the near future, gay marriage will be universally accepted by law, and the minority will have won.
Time to give Fight Club a viewing!
Less than 5% of the population has green eyes. Why don't we just deny them these rights and benefit your wallet that way? You're born with eye color just as you're born LGBT.
"I need your strength for me to be strong...I need your love to feel loved"
Can any great country or power be built without slavery? History proves otherwise. :corn:
I never understood the "equality" issue here. You can't force genders to be equal. They are biological.
Moreover, I have no idea why granting gays the right to "unite" instead of "marry", wouldn't solve the issue. Keep the word that meant one definition for 1000s of years (make one side happy), and give gays the rights they want so badly (other side happy). Because it is rights they want, right? Not the word "marriage"?
Hmmm...
Not so sure about that. If they want marriage - then I think the issue is more fishy because it seems to me they want a public form of approval on their form of relationship. And there is no way that will ever really happen. There will always be some who disapprove - and that's their right. Just take the civil union, realize your relationship is biologically different - so a different word is fine, and that solves that.
Regardless, government shouldn't be involved in any marriage. If they are, there should be a good reason. I can see why a government that propped up ponzi schemes would need youth. So, one reasonable argument I never understood the anti-gay marriage crowd doesn't use is "future taxpayers". By definition, gay couples can't procreate and create new taxpayers. Some would respond, well some couples can't either. True. But, the government doesn't know that. They know heterocouples have the possibility to do such.
Even that argument though is bogus. Government shouldn't be involved in marriage - period, financial or not. If gov't was out. That would solve this issue entirely. And leave us to discuss real issues.
I come in here and read nonsense from both sides. You're all crazy.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
This is complete and utter nonsense.
So what you are saying is that slavery can be okay? It's a simple question based off of your comments. Why can't you answer it?
You're asking me a question to a word that has a very broad definition. It's liking asking me if I like the color red. There are 100's of shades of red. Define the word and I will answer appropriately.
And to address your second point concerning the green eyed analogy...there are a lot of people who feel you weren't born LGBT and that it's a choice. I feel no need to comment how I feel becasue it's irrelevant...I'm just pointing that out.
Hey, that's not fair. I support gay marriage AND I'm proud to admit that I think what you guys do is icky!!!
And like I have said any great country can not be built without slavery.
Unreal. Stop dancing around it. We're going on 3 pages. Let's use the first sentence of Wikipedia which about sums it up
Slavery is a system under which people are treated as property to be bought and sold, and are forced to work
Now can that be acceptable?
I don't buy that for a second. So slavery is acceptable if you are building a "great" country?
Godfather.