Belkira wrote:
But your "logic" isn't grounded in fact. It's grounded in assumption and emotional attachment to your own personal position on the issue. You want it to be one way, so you rationalize why it should be whether that's the truth or not. The fact is, the only way we have to figure out what the public wants is through polls. Because I can take your rationale and turn it around so that it sonds like my position is right. It's hilarious to me that you call polling "playing games," but instead want to come up with some weird rationale as to why you're right and the people who know what they're doing are wrong.
The only difference is, I have the poll numbers on my side.
Oh, and lolwiki as your source...? Hm. Interesting.
The only difference is, I have the poll numbers on my side.
Oh, and lolwiki as your source...? Hm. Interesting.
You're full of trash.
I showed you two different polls that completely contradicted itself within the same month and you just basically chose the one that best suits your emotional attachment. You argue that you can "twist" my logic around, then do it. Let me see you try it, because you're full of trash. It's much easier to just pick and choose a random poll (1000/300,000,000) than it is to ignore what Republicans and Democrats in office vote for, speak on and support. You can't deny the diversity in the Senate. There are numbers to support that. You can't deny the number of people who are registered as "Republican" and the number who are registered as "Democrat". You can't deny the numbers of people voting for either Republican or Democrat. Those are actual numbers. Any estimation of those numbers are much more accurate than what 1000 people say.
All you have done was picked a poll of 1,000 people that supported your argument and ignored the other poll of 1,000 people that completely contradicted your position.
"LolWiki"? Wiki didn't conduct the survey, it only sourced the survey. If you don't believe that the survey existed or is accurate, then go look up the survey yourself, it's referenced on the page. Ironically, (actually not so much) you are doing exactly what you are accusing me of. You're ignoring the facts just to hold on to your emotional stance.
Belkira wrote:
And, of course, the whole thing is moot in my opinion. Mob rule is idiotic. There are certain basic things that shouldn't be decided on the whim of the majority. One of those is the rights of the minority.
And before you or gbaji want to go on and on about rights and "equal versus fair," I don't intend to go 'round and 'round on that again. That will be ignored.
And before you or gbaji want to go on and on about rights and "equal versus fair," I don't intend to go 'round and 'round on that again. That will be ignored.
That's nothing different than what you always do, ignore the facts that contradict your emotions. You realize that a man is held to the same restrictions as the next man regardless of either sexuality. You are merely trying to add additional rights to some while preventing the same additional rights to the others. That is entirely why I'm against SSM as of today.