"[you claim to] explicitly support homosexual unions as law" - My argument was to explicitly remove all laws regarding unions. I am neither righteous, nor a theist, and I have no source text to cut and paste. I would suggest that we all avoid ad hominem arguments.
I may be mistaken, but I see another false dilemma. I draw inspiration from James 2:18, and therefore I value humility over righteousness. I will discover the quality of my righteousness on Judgement Day.
Alas, you have succeeded in your personal attacks. My statement about being a theist was an error - I confused the definition of a theist with an advocate of a theocracy. Congratulations on your moral victory.But while we are at it, learn to use the threaded comments please?
Read InRussetShadows response below.Ignoring the Ad Hominem for a moment, can anyone come up with a *real* argument why government has to license marriage at all? The argument "gay people are bad" is hardly a justification.
janeunerNov 27, 2007
"[you claim to] explicitly support homosexual unions as law" - My argument was to explicitly remove all laws regarding unions. I am neither righteous, nor a theist, and I have no source text to cut and paste. I would suggest that we all avoid ad hominem arguments.
janeunerNov 28, 2007
I may be mistaken, but I see another false dilemma. I draw inspiration from James 2:18, and therefore I value humility over righteousness. I will discover the quality of my righteousness on Judgement Day.
janeunerNov 28, 2007
Alas, you have succeeded in your personal attacks. My statement about being a theist was an error - I confused the definition of a theist with an advocate of a theocracy. Congratulations on your moral victory.But while we are at it, learn to use the threaded comments please?
janeunerNov 28, 2007
Read InRussetShadows response below.Ignoring the Ad Hominem for a moment, can anyone come up with a *real* argument why government has to license marriage at all? The argument "gay people are bad" is hardly a justification.
janeunerNov 28, 2007
<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi</a>Unless, of course, you view your last two sentences favorably. But that would change the debate in its entirety.
madsquirrelNov 29, 2007
Clarification is in order:My previous comment was in two parts; the fist was a general rant about the destructive nature of homosexuality and how it fails to build its own environment as is the case for constructive belief systems. The second part of the comment is satirical and highlights the nihilistic nature of the Liberal Progressive movement; which, support Muslims that would under Sharia Law would have all homosexuals hung by the neck until dead.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stupid">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stupid</a><a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorance">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignorance</a><a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moron">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moron</a>