Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 12:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 12:20:00 PM (view original):
This one, if you need a fresher course:

Your mother puts you in a trash can when you're an infant because you're an annoying bastard.   The trashman finds you and raises you as his own.  He never mentions finding you in a smelly trash can.

25 years later, you meet a girl.   You date, you fall in love.   Turns out, your mother and father decided to try to make a better baby after you were discarded.   You're now dating, and nailing, your sister.     Incest is illegal.   

What's the difference between you and your sis in this situation and two dudes in love, morally speaking?

Let's say, for the sake of your example, that there isn't a difference morally.

So what?

OK, since we previously determined that marriage between siblings isn't denied due to health reasons(preggos can smoke and drink while fatties can eat Big Macs until they explode), why can't bro/sis marry?   

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 12:56:00 PM (view original):

Well, if you're going to ask me to speculate on "valid legal reasons" that lawmakers have for passing a law, it only seems reasonable to believe you know why.   I assumed you were leading me into an "AH-HA!!!" situation.   I guess I was wrong.  You're clueless as to why laws that you say lack legal grounds are being passed.  Go figure.

I'm not asking you to speculate.  I'm asking if you can give me an argument against allowing same sex marriage that you could use in court.  Obviously you can't go into court and win with "it should be banned because some people consider it immoral."

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 12:56:00 PM (view original):

Well, if you're going to ask me to speculate on "valid legal reasons" that lawmakers have for passing a law, it only seems reasonable to believe you know why.   I assumed you were leading me into an "AH-HA!!!" situation.   I guess I was wrong.  You're clueless as to why laws that you say lack legal grounds are being passed.  Go figure.

I'm not asking you to speculate.  I'm asking if you can give me an argument against allowing same sex marriage that you could use in court.  Obviously you can't go into court and win with "it should be banned because some people consider it immoral."

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok. 

I can say this in 36 states:  "My state doesn't allow it." 

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:20:00 PM (view original):
I think preventing birth defects is the main reason (even if other hazardous things aren't illegal).

If you disagree, why do you think incest is illegal?

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 12:56:00 PM (view original):

Well, if you're going to ask me to speculate on "valid legal reasons" that lawmakers have for passing a law, it only seems reasonable to believe you know why.   I assumed you were leading me into an "AH-HA!!!" situation.   I guess I was wrong.  You're clueless as to why laws that you say lack legal grounds are being passed.  Go figure.

I'm not asking you to speculate.  I'm asking if you can give me an argument against allowing same sex marriage that you could use in court.  Obviously you can't go into court and win with "it should be banned because some people consider it immoral."

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok. 

I can say this in 36 states:  "My state doesn't allow it." 

That's just a statement of fact.

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 12:56:00 PM (view original):

Well, if you're going to ask me to speculate on "valid legal reasons" that lawmakers have for passing a law, it only seems reasonable to believe you know why.   I assumed you were leading me into an "AH-HA!!!" situation.   I guess I was wrong.  You're clueless as to why laws that you say lack legal grounds are being passed.  Go figure.

I'm not asking you to speculate.  I'm asking if you can give me an argument against allowing same sex marriage that you could use in court.  Obviously you can't go into court and win with "it should be banned because some people consider it immoral."

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok. 

I can say this in 36 states:  "My state doesn't allow it." 

That's just a statement of fact.

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok.

That is my argument against it.

It's also my argument against driving 110 MPH on a crowded street. 

If you don't lke my argument, that's fine.   But it's right.

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 12:56:00 PM (view original):

Well, if you're going to ask me to speculate on "valid legal reasons" that lawmakers have for passing a law, it only seems reasonable to believe you know why.   I assumed you were leading me into an "AH-HA!!!" situation.   I guess I was wrong.  You're clueless as to why laws that you say lack legal grounds are being passed.  Go figure.

I'm not asking you to speculate.  I'm asking if you can give me an argument against allowing same sex marriage that you could use in court.  Obviously you can't go into court and win with "it should be banned because some people consider it immoral."

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok. 

I can say this in 36 states:  "My state doesn't allow it." 

That's just a statement of fact.

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok.

That is my argument against it.

It's also my argument against driving 110 MPH on a crowded street. 

If you don't lke my argument, that's fine.   But it's right.

The argument against driving 110 mph is that it's likely to kill someone.  Not that the state says it's illegal.

See the difference?

Assume we are starting from scratch and there is no law on the books.  I can give you solid reasoning to outlaw driving 110 mph.  Can you give me solid reasoning to ban same sex marriage?

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:08:00 PM (view original):
My argument for same sex marriage is that same sex couples want to get married.  We should let them.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:34:00 PM (view original):
Sure.

My point is that marriage is not a right.   The govenment lays out certain guidelines and, if you fail to meet those guidelines, you cannot marry regardless of your special circumstance.

I think I said this about 25-30 pages ago.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:17:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 12:56:00 PM (view original):

Well, if you're going to ask me to speculate on "valid legal reasons" that lawmakers have for passing a law, it only seems reasonable to believe you know why.   I assumed you were leading me into an "AH-HA!!!" situation.   I guess I was wrong.  You're clueless as to why laws that you say lack legal grounds are being passed.  Go figure.

I'm not asking you to speculate.  I'm asking if you can give me an argument against allowing same sex marriage that you could use in court.  Obviously you can't go into court and win with "it should be banned because some people consider it immoral."

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok. 

I can say this in 36 states:  "My state doesn't allow it." 

That's just a statement of fact.

If you don't have an argument against it, that's ok.

That is my argument against it.

It's also my argument against driving 110 MPH on a crowded street. 

If you don't lke my argument, that's fine.   But it's right.

The argument against driving 110 mph is that it's likely to kill someone.  Not that the state says it's illegal.

See the difference?

Assume we are starting from scratch and there is no law on the books.  I can give you solid reasoning to outlaw driving 110 mph.  Can you give me solid reasoning to ban same sex marriage?

Maybe I don't care if I kill someone.    Much like I don't care who cannot be married.

Understand?

If your reason is "You might kill someone", that's not acceptable.  I already said that's not a concern of mine.   I can give you reasons to ban SSM but you don't like them.   Much like I don't care about random people walking on the street where I'm doing 110.

Posted by jrd_x on 5/17/2012 1:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/17/2012 1:34:00 PM (view original):
Sure.

My point is that marriage is not a right.   The govenment lays out certain guidelines and, if you fail to meet those guidelines, you cannot marry regardless of your special circumstance.

I think I said this about 25-30 pages ago.

Well you argued that there are no rights period.

Assuming that we have rights, established by either the constitution or by case law stemming from constitutional interpretation, marriage is a right (est in loving v virginia)

In order to take that right away, (as CA did with Prop 8) the state needs a compelling reason to do so.  Without one, the law is overturned.

You've said many times that you don't have a reason to ban same sex marriage, so I'll assume that you agree with the court's ruling.