You just used the disengenuous talking points from Act!Up - which is absolutely creating a parallel.

As is drivers licenses for convicted drunk drivers. But you need to argue it on it's own merits.

How clever - just as clever as "if you oppose sub-prime mortgages, don't get one."

The first issue is that you are dishonest. There is no law against homosexual marrying. Marraige however, has a meaning. You seek to change the established meaning - and you seek to do this through edict, knowing full well that you cannot prevail under the law.

The left seeks dictatorial rule - foolishly believing the expediency of dictatorial edict will always favor them.

Lenin embraced homosexuals - Stalin shot them.

__________________
Miss Vicky - VictorDanilchenko, proven and shameless liar

http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/gen...tml#post709726

What some tards don't seem to realize - or maybe insist on not realizing - is that gay marriage does absolutely no harm to society. When you prohibit something by law, there really should be a good basis for it. Homophobia and religious mumbo jumbo are not a good basis.

As I've said before, banning gay marriage serves no purpose beyond satisfying bigots. That's ALL it does. Laws against gay marriage exist solely because of that. So much for freedom, huh?

Claiming the goal is "dictatorial rule" is a pretty weak defense. No one wants that. However, it's necessary to keep the majority from creating laws that harm an innocent minority. Any laws that prohibit something, anything, for no practical reason, should be eliminated. That includes gay marriage.

Oh, and on the topic of dictatorial rule... Funny how the rightwing nuts are the ones clinging to pointless, discriminating laws, isn't it?

I am not a rightwing nut, and I also support gay marriage. What I do not support is a court overturning the majority of the vote....

However, I also believe that the validity of someones family should not be up for a vote.

__________________
A house divided against itself, cannot stand.
-Abraham Lincoln

What some tards don't seem to realize - or maybe insist on not realizing - is that gay marriage does absolutely no harm to society.
Homos create and spread AIDS.
Divorcing Homos will be a burden on the court $y$tem.
Married Homos will get a tax dodge.
Married Homos will be a burden on Social Security benefit$.
AIDS is ruining the US healthcare system!

Homo marriage is about one thing $$$$$$$$$$$$$.

__________________
President-elect Clinton fooled the American people

While straight marriage is about fluffy-wuffy love. I've heard it all before.

I'd love to see things from your point of view some time, Wow, but I can't get my head that far up my ass.

No doubt, marriage is a failure, why make it worse?

The idea behind marriage is to promote human reproduction.

__________________
President-elect Clinton fooled the American people

HOMOSEXUALITY is NO CIVIL RIGHTS issue!!!

There is no right to be a SEXUAL PERVERT!!!

Actually, it was a matter of ownership of women, but nevermind all that jazz if it doesn't work in your favor.

Did you emote this on your own? Or are you reading from a script from Act!Up (via Moveon or the DNC)

Have you ever stopped to consider marriage as an institution? Oh sorry - you wouldn't consider since you are a lefty - and how you feel about it will be of no use in understanding.

Nearly every human society in recorded history has had the institution of marriage - from tribal societies to modern ones. Vladimir Lenin’s attempts to outlaw marriage were an utter and complete failure, even Eskimos marry.

Why? Why did diverse societies develop the same social code, over and over again? Oh sorry - need to consider my audience - how does the institution of marriage being universal make you feel, Loa?

There is a reason - which any reputable anthropologist will share, human evolution drives the institution of marraige. Marriage developed to ensure the survival of the species. Humans are social animals - creating social pressure on the males of the species to remain and care for their offspring increases the survivability of the species as a whole. This is why marriage is virtually universal in human societies - it is nearly instinctual in our species.

Because the impetus is for the male to care for the offspring, polygamy is common. A male caring for the offspring of several females is still an evolutionary advantage.

However, homosexuality is rarely tolerated in human societies - and generally found in societies which are in decline as a sign of social decay and collapse.

Why? Homosexuality provides no evolutionary advantage and is in fact a disadvantage to the species.

Oh sorry, I was using reason again.

Please - disregard fact and anthropological reality - how do you feel about gay marriage?

__________________
Miss Vicky - VictorDanilchenko, proven and shameless liar

http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/gen...tml#post709726

AIDS is a virus - while true that homosexuals are the main carries and spread of the disease - they do not and cannot "create" the virus. HIV is passed from warm bodily fluids directly into the bloodstream. Any condition which allows this to happen can spread the virus. Anal sex is a prime condition for spreading the virus, so it spreads quickly among homosexuals. The virus doesn't think - it doesn't target any group - it will strike anyone if the conditions are right.

Negligable - illegal aliens divorcing are a far greater burden.

They will be subject to the marriage penalty and will see an increase in taxes.

I don't see how, unless surviving spouses claim SSI.

What do you base this claim on? 72% of healthcare costs are spent on Americans over 65 years old.

__________________
Miss Vicky - VictorDanilchenko, proven and shameless liar

http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/gen...tml#post709726