The So-Called Marriage Protection Amendment

[Charleston native]

2 for 2 on straw man arguments, gator, keep them coming. That is hardly what Midway meant and you know it.

[gradco2004]

I have nothing productive to say... interesting thread, though.

[Charles Hunter]

It wasn't all that long ago that inter-racial marriage (esp. black/white) was considered by law and many Americans, as being "against God and the natural order of things".

Or is this another "straw man"?

[gatorback]

Your intolerance is not going to be my burdon.  I feel if one pays equal taxes they should be afforded equal protections it's that simple.  It's quintessential America.  If you love America, then you are for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.   I think it's in our Premable?  You thinking my family is less moral then yours, or his, or theirs is completely and without qualification the most asinine rant ever to waste bits in this space.

[Charleston native]

Ah, the personal attacks for having a different point of view...such tolerance. No wonder the Repubs are shifting left. I didn't say your family is less moral, but the term "family" has already been changed and manipulated by our condoning culture. So I guess we're at an empasse because we view family differently.

And yes, Charles, that is another straw man. You guys are on a roll! Inter-racial marriage needed to be allowed because race does not distort the natural order of a marriage, which is predicated on pro-creation. Marriage of different races still preserves the institutional fabric of what marriage has been through the ages of time: between one man and one woman. Regardless of what the Bible says about it (yes, even outside Judeo-Christian principles that many of you seem to despise), that has been the order of things throughout the existence of man...in countless different cultures.

[Midway ®]

I am having a difficult time trying to understand exactly the point that you are trying to make. Remember clarity and brevity are everything.  Also, I think you may mean Impasse, as opposed to the Italian word empasse?

[Charles Hunter]

Charleston, is your problem with the term "marriage" for granting "partner rights"?  Or do you also oppose "civil unions" that grant rights to homosexual couples?  This would not "change the definition of marriage", but would grant legal rights (survivorship, medical decision and information, insurance, taxes, and so on).

The proposed Florida amendment would ban this arrangement, also.  Which makes me think it is more about being anti-homosexual then it is about "preserving [heterosexual] marriage".  And, yes, I know that many in the gay community (at least officially) oppose anything short of the term marriage, even though other constructs may have the same legal provisions.

And, Midway, be a little less pedantic - typos, spelling and grammar errors are common in forums like this.  As long as we can understand each other ... cut us a little slack?

[Midway ®]

Those are not grammatical errors. They are usage errors that simply add to the sense of confusion within the post. Important social issues are being discussed here. The participants should comport themselves with a modicum of intelligence. If they are incapable of doing so, there opinions become suspect as well.

In other words, maybe their thoughts are as slapdash as their writing?

[Midway ®]

The typo is for y'all

[Charleston native]

I am having a difficult time trying to understand exactly the point that you are trying to make. Remember clarity and brevity are everything.  Also, I think you may mean Impasse, as opposed to the Italian word empasse?

I have a newborn baby...I don't have time for spell check, and it was late at night. 

[Charleston native]

...If they are incapable of doing so, there opinions become suspect as well.

In other words, maybe their thoughts are as slapdash as their writing?

Well, Midway, thanks for the divisive comments and hijacking the thread. If you weren't so anal, maybe you could look past the slight grammatical or spelling errors and actually stick with the subject at hand. Usually, people who attack errors like this do so because they are inept at making points in the debate.

If there is one thing I despise, it's condescending tripe that you have just written. If you can't make a valid point that's even relevant to the subject at hand, stay the hell out of the conversation.

[second_pancake]

Your intolerance is not going to be my burdon.  I feel if one pays equal taxes they should be afforded equal protections it's that simple.  It's quintessential America.  If you love America, then you are for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.   I think it's in our Premable?  You thinking my family is less moral then yours, or his, or theirs is completely and without qualification the most asinine rant ever to waste bits in this space.

Amen. 

As for some other folks on here (you know who you are), regardless of how many times someone disagreed with your viewpoints or the manner in which they WROTE they disagreed with it, at no time did anyone make a demand for you to concede and step out of the forum.  I think that same respect needs to be offered to others as well.  So, if you want to wish someone to "hell", please do so in your place of worship, not in this forum.

[Charleston native]

Amen. 

As for some other folks on here (you know who you are), regardless of how many times someone disagreed with your viewpoints or the manner in which they WROTE they disagreed with it, at no time did anyone make a demand for you to concede and step out of the forum.  I think that same respect needs to be offered to others as well.  So, if you want to wish someone to "hell", please do so in your place of worship, not in this forum.

Pancake, like a complete liberal, you twist and manipulate my words to make yourself look morally superior, which is something I cannot stand. At no time did I tell Midway to get off the forum...I merely said (out of my frustration at his condescension towards me because of one misspelled word and one grammatical error in my previous posts) that if he couldn't make posts that actually pertained to the subject at hand, he basically needed to not post. My "request" had nothing to do with whether or not I disagreed with him on the issue of the marriage amendment.

As for gatorback, he is entitled to his opinion as I am mine. At no point in my post did I direct my frustration at him specifically due to our disagreement; however, it is apparent that he was upset at my comments, calling them asinine.

And you wonder why I don't like to debate issues with you? Good grief.

[second_pancake]

Pancake, like a complete liberal, you twist and manipulate my words to make yourself look morally superior

1)  I am not, nor have I ever professed to be, a liberal.  If you must know, I'm a registered independent

2)  I never "twisted" any of your words.  I believe I simply used your own words against you, "If you can't make a valid point that's even relevant to the subject at hand, stay the hell out of the conversation."

And you wonder why I don't like to debate issues with you?[

Uh...no, I don't "wonder".  In fact, you might be surprised at how very little I wonder or think about you at all.

[Charleston native]

It doesn't matter if you've professed to be a liberal or not. Your words and actions on this forum alone define what you really stand for, and I have yet to see an "independent" thought come from you. You toe the liberal agenda on almost everything, from what I've read.

Using my words against me is considered manipulation. You also twisted the context of my posts, which were directed to Midway with his ostentatious concerns on my spelling and grammar, and somehow directed them to gatorback and his opinions. And I DIDN'T tell somebody to go to hell. YOU took my statement of frustration and twisted it in your own warped logic. It's pretty sad that you would do that, but I shouldn't expect anything less from you.

I notice you said nothing of Midway basically questioning my intelligence, which was the sole reason I got upset. Picking and choosing, aren't we?