« Previous 1 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 104 Next »

This thread is locked

Prop 8 OverturnedFollow

#1752 Aug 28 2010 at 11:45 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1709511392366

Sage

6,471 posts

Almalieque wrote:

You mean like my position that I've only referenced to a million times now? Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean that I don't have a position nor the balls to have one.

It would be very helpful to everyone in this thread if you'd actually just come out and say if you're in favor of SSM or not, and why.

Edited, Aug 29th 2010 1:45am by Eske

#1753 Aug 29 2010 at 12:07 AM Rating: Excellent

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

Almalieque wrote:

I was right all along.

Heh.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

#1754 Aug 29 2010 at 12:20 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1649636418093

View User Forum

Sage

30,646 posts

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

You mean like my position that I've only referenced to a million times now? Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean that I don't have a position nor the balls to have one.

It would be very helpful to everyone in this thread if you'd actually just come out and say if you're in favor of SSM or not, and why.

Edited, Aug 29th 2010 1:45am by Eske

Why? What does it matter, really? If he doesn't want to take a position, then he doesn't. I don't see how knowing he's really pro-same-sex marriage but likes to argue will make it any different than if he's anti-same-sex marriage.

I believe he's stated before that he's against changing anything (re marriage) unless someone convinces him, which no one has done yet. And I don't think it likely that anyone ever will, to be honest.

#1755 Aug 29 2010 at 12:36 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1709511392366

Sage

6,471 posts

Belkira the Tulip wrote:

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

You mean like my position that I've only referenced to a million times now? Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean that I don't have a position nor the balls to have one.

It would be very helpful to everyone in this thread if you'd actually just come out and say if you're in favor of SSM or not, and why.

Edited, Aug 29th 2010 1:45am by Eske

Why? What does it matter, really? If he doesn't want to take a position, then he doesn't. I don't see how knowing he's really pro-same-sex marriage but likes to argue will make it any different than if he's anti-same-sex marriage.

I believe he's stated before that he's against changing anything (re marriage) unless someone convinces him, which no one has done yet. And I don't think it likely that anyone ever will, to be honest.

I'd like him to say what he actually thinks, so that we can finally do away with this thin veneer of "objectivity" that he thinks he's hiding behind. It's annoying me.

He already has a position, and we all know what it is. I just want him to put it into words, so that he doesn't get to do his "I'm arguing against bad arguments" defense every single time someone makes a point against the ban. It's a pathetic argumentative tactic that sadly, is only one of the many mental barriers that he's using to actually have to confront a relevant point.

I'd like to do away with it, and he has no legitimate reason to continue keeping it a "secret." It's an easy one to knock off the list. I've been stymied on the "equality/fairness" and "constitution" debacles because he's apparently degenerated to responding to my posts with randomly assembled thoughts that have no cohesive meaning or logical basis. I'm giving up on those for the time being.

#1756 Aug 29 2010 at 12:44 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1649636418093

View User Forum

Sage

30,646 posts

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

I'd like him to say what he actually thinks, so that we can finally do away with this thin veneer of "objectivity" that he thinks he's hiding behind. It's annoying me.

He already has a position, and we all know what it is. I just want him to put it into words, so that he doesn't get to do his "I'm arguing against bad arguments" defense every single time someone makes a point against the ban. It's a pathetic argumentative tactic that sadly, is only one of the many mental barriers that he's using to actually have to confront a relevant point.

I'd like to do away with it, and he has no legitimate reason to continue keeping it a "secret." It's an easy one to knock off the list. I've been stymied on the "equality/fairness" and "constitution" debacles because he's apparently degenerated to responding to my posts with randomly assembled thoughts that have no cohesive meaning or logical basis. I'm giving up on those for the time being.

Good luck. Smiley: laugh

#1757 Aug 29 2010 at 1:00 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1709511392366

Sage

6,471 posts

Belkira the Tulip wrote:

Good luck. Smiley: laugh

You're right, who am I kidding. Smiley: glare

#1758 Aug 29 2010 at 5:43 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1636935913888

Sage

27,272 posts

Almalieque wrote:

Xsarus wrote:

Oh also, I'm not sure what skin you use, but yellow is really really annoying and hard to read, could you stop using it?

I'm sorry, but no. I don't know what skin everyone uses nor can I predict it.

Don't expect anyone to actually read whatever you highlight in yellow then.

Oh, and what Eske said.

#1759 Aug 29 2010 at 6:45 AM Rating: Default

The All Knowing

10,265 posts

Eske, Star Breaker wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

You mean like my position that I've only referenced to a million times now? Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean that I don't have a position nor the balls to have one.

It would be very helpful to everyone in this thread if you'd actually just come out and say if you're in favor of SSM or not, and why.

Edited, Aug 29th 2010 1:45am by Eske

Almalieque for like the bajillionth time wrote:

My position has always been "I have personal beliefs against same sex marriage, but if one is able to provide a legitimate argument to allow it (which none has been provided yet) then I wouldn't oppose it.

I've stated and or referenced to this multiple times already. I'm not hiding behind anything. You just don't like my position because you want me to say "I'm against SSM because it's icky" or something stupid like that.

Honestly, throughout this thread, I have been caring less and less if the ban on SSM is lifted, but, I care very much if it is lifted on some stupid argument like "It's not equal" or "you're denying my right to marry".

I'm sorry if you can't comprehend how I can legitimately have this stance, but that is a personal problem. At the same time, you can't act like I'm hiding behind anything.

#1760 Aug 29 2010 at 6:51 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1636935913888

Sage

27,272 posts

So what personal belief do you have against same sex marriage?

#1761 Aug 29 2010 at 6:57 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1596990078323

View User Forum

Sage

19,727 posts

His Excellency Aethien wrote:

So what personal belief do you have against same sex marriage?

It's icky.

#1762 Aug 29 2010 at 6:59 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1630282721753

View User Forum

Sage

14,174 posts

A gay guy raped him in the butt, leaving his **** a putrid cauldron of disease.

#1763 Almalieque, Posted: Aug 29 2010 at 7:11 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Wow, I didn't see this question coming for the jillionth time.

#1764 Aug 29 2010 at 7:17 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1630282721753

View User Forum

Sage

14,174 posts

Quote:

My personal belief has exactly zero relevance to the arguments that I'm making.

Sure it does. It doesn't invalidate them - they are devoid of merit on their own grounds - but it explains entirely why you think otherwise.

Edited, Aug 29th 2010 1:18pm by Kavekk

#1765 Aug 29 2010 at 7:42 AM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1596990078323

View User Forum

Sage

19,727 posts

Almalieque wrote:

Barkingturtle wrote:

His Excellency Aethien wrote:

So what personal belief do you have against same sex marriage?

It's icky.

Wow, I didn't see this question coming for the jillionth time.

My personal belief has exactly zero relevance to the arguments that I'm making. Not only will it be a tangent, it's personal belief which means there is no evidence to show it's true. I'm not going to waste time arguing something that I can't prove. You all want me to just so you can say "you have no proof" and then try to somehow tie that to my other arguments that I've made to say "you're wrong".

Wow, you're a pretty huge coward.

#1766 Aug 29 2010 at 7:49 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1636935913888

Sage

27,272 posts

Almalieque wrote:

Barkingturtle wrote:

His Excellency Aethien wrote:

So what personal belief do you have against same sex marriage?

It's icky.

Wow, I didn't see this question coming for the jillionth time.

My personal belief has exactly zero relevance to the arguments that I'm making. Not only will it be a tangent, it's personal belief which means there is no evidence to show it's true. I'm not going to waste time arguing something that I can't prove. You all want me to just so you can say "you have no proof" and then try to somehow tie that to my other arguments that I've made to say "you're wrong".

I am actually just interested in what you have against same sex marriage as I want to try and understand what you think and why.
I've given up on this argument as it's not going anywhere and it won't ever go anywhere either.

That said, for the next thread please don't reply if all you're going to do is argue how others are wrong especially if you're not going to do anything other than that.

#1767 Aug 29 2010 at 8:00 AM Rating: Good

View User Forum

ZAM Administrator

10,601 posts

Quote:

I'm sorry, but no. I don't know what skin everyone uses nor can I predict it.

Smiley: dubious

So just don't use colours?

Quote:

1. Showing reasonable evidence = showing how its unjustified.

it's unjustified because the reasons that justified it before no longer exist. Now as you pointed out there might be new reasons, but they'd have to be provided before we can have a discussion about it.

____________________________

01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ

#1768 Aug 29 2010 at 8:04 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1596990078323

View User Forum

Sage

19,727 posts

Sir Xsarus wrote:

Quote:

I'm sorry, but no. I don't know what skin everyone uses nor can I predict it.

Smiley: dubious

So just don't use colours?

Or just realize that most posters here aren't pedOphiles, so we don't use the FFXI skin.

#1769 Almalieque, Posted: Aug 29 2010 at 11:29 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I'm not denying that, all I'm saying is in your argument, you have to actually prove that. That means stating what those older reasons were and how they don't apply to today's society.

#1770 Aug 29 2010 at 11:32 AM Rating: Good

View User Forum

ZAM Administrator

10,601 posts

Quote:

I'm not denying that, all I'm saying is in your argument, you have to actually prove that. That means stating what those older reasons were and how they don't apply to today's society.

I have done that.

Quote:

Personally, if I were arguing for SSM, I wouldn't do any of that. I would fight to create a new definition of marriage that just so happens to include SSM. That way you don't have to worry about defining old reasons and countering them, let the opponents support their old reasons. That seems to be the most efficient avenue of approach.

The problem is that scrapping an entire system and rebuilding it isn't feasible or realistic. It's a nice idea, and might in some ways be much better, but there is far too much inertia for it to be realistic.

____________________________

01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ

#1771 Aug 29 2010 at 11:38 AM Rating: Good

__DEL__1649636418093

View User Forum

Sage

30,646 posts

Almalieque wrote:

Belkira, before you think I'm being "hypocritical" for referencing them to an entire thread, I'm doing that because not only is it a complete tangent, it can't be fully explained in one or two quotes.

Meh. Enough people have asked you now that I think it's safe to address that to the entire forum. Smiley: lol

#1772 Aug 29 2010 at 12:26 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1681085903309

View User Forum

Scholar

21,720 posts

Why are you people still trying to reason with Alma on page 36? Stooping to his level and all that...

#1773 Aug 29 2010 at 12:35 PM Rating: Good

View User Forum

ZAM Administrator

10,601 posts

Belkira the Tulip wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

Belkira, before you think I'm being "hypocritical" for referencing them to an entire thread, I'm doing that because not only is it a complete tangent, it can't be fully explained in one or two quotes.

Meh. Enough people have asked you now that I think it's safe to address that to the entire forum. Smiley: lol

this thread, right? I read through the first 5 pages or so really quickly but didn't find you laying your opinion out, although I did find you insisting you did once. Can you link me to a post in there where you actually outline why you're opposed to gay marriage?

____________________________

01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ

#1774 Aug 29 2010 at 12:42 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1649636418093

View User Forum

Sage

30,646 posts

Sir Xsarus wrote:

Belkira the Tulip wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

Belkira, before you think I'm being "hypocritical" for referencing them to an entire thread, I'm doing that because not only is it a complete tangent, it can't be fully explained in one or two quotes.

Meh. Enough people have asked you now that I think it's safe to address that to the entire forum. Smiley: lol

this thread, right? I read through the first 5 pages or so really quickly but didn't find you laying your opinion out, although I did find you insisting you did once. Can you link me to a post in there where you actually outline why you're opposed to gay marriage?

I'm not sure why you quoted that. Smiley: frown

#1775 Aug 29 2010 at 12:44 PM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1630282721753

View User Forum

Sage

14,174 posts

BrownDuck wrote:

Why are you people still trying to reason... on page 36?

Heh.

#1776 Almalieque, Posted: Aug 29 2010 at 1:13 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I didn't even click on the link because I'm not getting involved in that argument. If it's the 20-30+ page thread that I'm referring to, then I assure you it's in there multiple times.

« Previous 1 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 104 Next »

This thread is locked

You cannot post in a locked topic!

Recent Visitors: 159 All times are in CST

Anonymous Guests (159)

© 2024 Fanbyte LLC