Sure, I don't care about either of those "rights".    What else you got?

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 2:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/15/2012 2:01:00 PM (view original):
Sure, I'm fine with both of tose suggestions.    Mostly because I don't care who gets married and who doesn't.   If the people I help vote into office want to make laws, well, I helped vote them into office.  No one to blame but me.

You're OK with banning interracial marriage?

You're also OK with banning marriage between people of different religions?

Wow.

Surely even you can see that there's a huge difference between (a) advocating that those things be banned, and (b) indifference because they don't affect him and they're not his battles to fight.

Posted by tecwrg2 on 5/15/2012 2:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 2:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/15/2012 2:01:00 PM (view original):
Sure, I'm fine with both of tose suggestions.    Mostly because I don't care who gets married and who doesn't.   If the people I help vote into office want to make laws, well, I helped vote them into office.  No one to blame but me.

You're OK with banning interracial marriage?

You're also OK with banning marriage between people of different religions?

Wow.

Surely even you can see that there's a huge difference between (a) advocating that those things be banned, and (b) indifference because they don't affect him and they're not his battles to fight.

With 16,000+ posts, he certainly doesn't need you riding to his rescue.  I'm sure mike can speak for himself.

No, he doesn't understand that. 

Yes, I've spoken for myself.   I don't care who is allowed to marry or who isn't allowed to marry(assuming, of course, they are people and consenting).   I don't expect my opinion on the subject to change.    I don't think it's a "right" nor do I think it's that important in the grand scheme of things.

Posted by tecwrg2 on 5/15/2012 1:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 1:44:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg2 on 5/15/2012 1:42:00 PM (view original):
Sorry, that's deflecting the question again.

Why do YOU think that same-sex marriage is an inalienable right?

Yes, same sex marriage is a right.  As is heterosexual marriage.

Do you think marriage itself is a right?

I didn't ask if you thought same-sex marriage was a right.  You've been arguing that for 20+ pages, so obviously you do.

I asked WHY you think same-sex marriage is a right.

Still waiting for an answer to this.

Is interracial marriage a right?

Personally, I don't care if gay people marry.  What bugs me is that they've tried to pass laws in California (bastion of liberalism) TWICE and failed.  One of those years was 2008 when Obama got elected by a big margin here.   And even though they can't get unanimity from the Obama-mandate,  they're still whining about it.

Listen, if you can't get a law passed in CA granting the "privilege" for SSM, then it's not something that enough people think is a "right", even in the gayest state in the union.  If you don't like it, move to MA or some state that recognizes your civil union as a "marriage".

If it requires a special law to make it legal, then it isn't a "right"... it's a privilege.

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Is interracial marriage a right?

Are you pathologically incapable of answering a question without trying to deflect it back?

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Is interracial marriage a right?

Nope.   Marriage is not a right.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/15/2012 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Is interracial marriage a right?

Nope.   Marriage is not a right.

And, just so we're clear, you're ok with government not allowing interracial marriage?

Posted by toddcommish on 5/15/2012 2:30:00 PM (view original):
Personally, I don't care if gay people marry.  What bugs me is that they've tried to pass laws in California (bastion of liberalism) TWICE and failed.  One of those years was 2008 when Obama got elected by a big margin here.   And even though they can't get unanimity from the Obama-mandate,  they're still whining about it.

Listen, if you can't get a law passed in CA granting the "privilege" for SSM, then it's not something that enough people think is a "right", even in the gayest state in the union.  If you don't like it, move to MA or some state that recognizes your civil union as a "marriage".

If it requires a special law to make it legal, then it isn't a "right"... it's a privilege.

Same sex couples had the right to marry in California prior to 2008.  Prop 8, the 2008 law you're referring to, banned same sex marriage.  That law has now been overturned in Federal Court.

Posted by toddcommish on 5/15/2012 2:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Is interracial marriage a right?

Are you pathologically incapable of answering a question without trying to deflect it back?

He's not answering the question because he apparently has adopted "same-sex marriage" as his "cause" here in this particular thread, but cannot articulate why.

I'm pretty sure that jrd is a social cause wanna-be.  I wouldn't be surprised if he was one of the Occupiers in his town last fall because he thought it would be cool, though he had no clue what it was really all about.  But if felt great to be part of the "cause".

Which is why the entire Occupy movement turned out to be such a massive fail during the fall of 2011.

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 2:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/15/2012 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/15/2012 2:26:00 PM (view original):
Is interracial marriage a right?

Nope.   Marriage is not a right.

And, just so we're clear, you're ok with government not allowing interracial marriage?

I don't make laws.   Which one of these words is confusing you?  "Nope.   Marriage is not a right."

Want to drive?  Get a license.
Want a gun?  Get a license.
Want to marry?  Get a license.

To the best of my knowledge, only one of those is addressed in the Constituion(an amendment at that) and you STILL HAVE TO GET A LICENSE.   That doesn't sound like a "right" to me.   Sounds like you have to meet specific conditions.   

Once you agree to get license, you're agreeing that the government is determining that you're actually asking for a privilege.