Gay Marriage

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

You've nailed me on that one. I had forgotten the negative public attitude against interracial marriage in 1957, the year I graduated from high school.

---

So answer the question:Given that more people were against interracial marriage at the time Loving v. Virginia was decided than are currently against same-sex marriage, are you saying that Loving v. Virginia was wrongly decided?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

But I said I favored state-sanctioned civil unions for gays, but not state-sanctioned marriages for them. What's so bad about that if everything else is equal?

---

Because it is unconstitutional. Because despite all the wonderful speeches people will make about how they will be "equal," the reality is that they won't be.In all the states that provide "civil union," not one of them is equal to marriage.Not one.Even though the legislatures promised that they would be.Have you forgotten the lessons from Plessy v. Ferguson? There is no such thing as "separate but equal." By making a distinction, you necessarily declare that there is a difference between the two and if there is a difference, then they can legally be treated differently.The only way to achieve equality is to have a single contract for all.Now are you seriously claiming that the best solution is for all 50 states and the feds to rewrite literally thousands of laws to replace the word "marriage" with the phrase "civil union"? How on earth would you guarantee that? What would you do if a state refused to do so? Would state A's "marriage" be legally the same as state B's "civil union"? We'd have to write a law to declare it to be so.That's the most efficient solution you can think of?No, the best solution is to leave the contract of marriage alone and simply recognize that it applies to all. What's so hard about applying a single contract to everyone? The groundwork has already been established. Everybody knows what it means. Nothing changes and we guarantee that everybody gets the same thing everywhere.

quote:

---

And I also explained why the state should get out of the marriage business altogether. What more do you want from me?

---

For you to actually believe it. You claim this to be your position, but you never mention it except when the subject of same-sex marriage comes up. I don't see you at the county clerk's office protesting the government involvement in marriage. For someone who thinks the government has no place in marriage, you keep referring to those civil contracts you had as "marriages."I expect you to live up to your own hype.

quote:

---

What questions haven't I answered?

---

The same ones you haven't answered for weeks:How does the neighbor's marriage affect you?
Was Loving v. Virginia wrongly decided?
Was Romer v. Evans wrongly decided?
Was Lawrence v. Texas wrongly decided?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

However, I predict that it will become a matter of choice for them when the causes of gayness are understood and effective means for correction are improvised.

---

There's nothing to "correct."Put your money where your mouth is: Go out right now and find someone of the same sex, get massively turned on, and do what you can to eventually wind up in bed with him. When you finally succeed (we can wait through the dating period for you to earn his trust), come back and give us the details of how you got off and how you'll want to do it again and again and again.

quote:

---

The jury is still out this matter of choice.

---

When can I expect you for your "treatment," Hoot Mon? I've got the car battery waiting.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon responds to me:

quote:

---

What is separate about the law if it gets out of the marriage business?

---

But you don't really want that. Oh, you say you do, but talk is cheap. You never seem to make this argument except when the question of equal marriage comes up. You don't talk about your own relationships as "civil unions." Instead, you're whole hog into the civil contract of "marriage."So as soon as you start believing your own hype, then we'll start believing you.

quote:

---

There is nothing separate at all if both gays and striaghts are allowed to have the civil unions they desire.

---

But that isn't your argument (there's that not believing your own hype thing, again.) You want "marriage" for straights and "civil unions" for gays. That violates the Constitution or have you forgotten the lessons from Plessy v. Ferguson? There is no such thing as "separate but equal." By making a distinction, you necessarily declare that there is a difference between the two and if there is a difference, then they can legally be treated differently.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon responds to me:

quote:

---

Please stop it!

---

Awww....sweetie, honey, baby, pussycat...you didn't think you were gonna bed me, did you? No, I'm the one with the car battery to cure you of your heterosexuality. I'm not going to have sex with you, so don't ask anymore.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

But why does it need to be a "marriage"?

---

Because that's what the current contract is. Since "separate but equal" doesn't exist and is unconstitutional, the only solution is to have "marriage."See, this is why I keep on saying that you don't believe your own argument. This isn't about granting equal rights. This is about creating a separate, and thus necessarily unequal, contract.Not one state that has a "civil union" has it be the equal to marriage.Not one.Why does it have to be "marriage"? Because no other contract is the same. If you truly believe in equality, if you truly believed your own hype, then you wouldn't hesitate to call it "marriage" because that's what the contract is actually called.Since you don't, it's clear you're simply blowing smoke.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

Not yet. Not until it is so well understood that it can be "corrected" if one should make that choice. I'm afraid I still suspect that if Chuck and Larry should raise little Bobbie into manhood, then little Bobbie would be more likely to turn out gay. And I have to ask if this is a good thing for little Bobbie. I don't believe there are enough scientific data on this matter to know what really happens to little Bobbie.

---

I'm very sorry about your penis, Hoot Mon, that you have to fantasize about the great conspiracy to turn the world gay. And just because you think the gay men are out for your ass doesn't mean they really are."Black people shouldn't be allowed to get married. Not yet. Not until it is so well understood that it can be 'corrected' if one should make that choice. I'm afraid I still suspect that if Jane and John Black should raise little Bobbie into adulthood, then little Bobbie would be more likely to turn out black. And I have to ask if that is a good thing for little Bobbie. I don't believe there are enough scientific data on this matter to know what really happens to little Bobbie."If it's a piece of crap argument when applied to race, why does it suddenly gain legitimacy when applied to sexual orientation?What caused yours, Hoot Mon? I'm still waiting for an answer. Did you accidentally see your father naked and you then developed a neurotic hatred of the male body?

quote:

---

Interracial marriage is one thing society eventually got used to, but I'm not yet ready to invite Chuck and Larry over to dinner.

---

So because you can't handle it, that's a legitimate reason to deny rights?Remember, more people were against interracial marriage at the time Loving v. Virginia was decided than are currently against same-sex marriage.Are you saying Loving v. Virginia was wrongly decided?And how many times do I have to directly ask you that question before you give an answer?

quote:

---

However, I'm not yet ready to invite Tom and his three wives over to dinner, or Clarence and his sheep over to dinner, either.

---

Please explain how being gay directly leads to polygamy and bestiality while being straight does not. Considering that up until just now, there was no such thing as gay marriage, how was it that polygamy and bestiality even existed in the first place? It would seem that mixed-sex marriage is the cause of polygamy and bestiality since there has only been mixed-sex marriage. All the polygamists you've ever heard of were all straight, f'rinstance.

quote:

---

That must make me even a bigger bigot.

---

Indeed. Why on earth would you bring up polygamy and bestiality in a discussion about sexual orientation? How does being gay lead to such while being straight does not?Be specific.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

But why aren't civil unions enough for legal purposes?

---

Because the contract is "marriage." A "civil union" is a separate contract and as we can tell by simple inspection, there isn't a single state that offers a "civil union" that is the equal of marriage.Not one.Since "separate but equal" is unconstitutional, the only solution is a single contract. Since the contract that exists is "marriage," then that is the contract that everybody gets.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

My testicles, working in consort with my hypothalamus and a few other delicate parts, caused my heterosexuality. I'm sure of it. Who are you to say they didn't?

---

But gay men have those things, too. They are, after all, men. Could you be more specific?

quote:

---

But I can't speak for gays with testicles; they seem a little queer to me.

---

And you wonder why you keep getting tagged as a bigot.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

But please tell why it is any less heterophobic nonsense to push "gay marriage" in our faces.

---

Ah, yes...the "refusal to accept bigotry is bigotry!" argument.How does the neighbor's marriage affect you? When gay people get married, exactly what happens to straight couples who wish to get married? Only so many people can ever get married and if we let gay people get married, the straight people won't be allowed to?Be specific. How does the neighbor's marriage affect you?

quote:

---

For a heterosexual person to believe that marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman does not make him or her a homophobic bigot.

---

That's precisely what it makes them.If you want it for yourself but don't want it for others, then you're a bigot.

quote:

---

Otherwise, all those who oppose polygamy are polyphobic bigots.

---

What does that have to do with anything? How does same-sex marriage lead to polygamy where mixed-sex marriage does not? All the polygamists we've ever heard of were all straight. It would seem that it is mixed-sex marriage that leads to polygamy.

quote:

---

And I suppose there are bestiphobic bigots and incestophibic bigots, too.

---

Huh? What does any of this have to do with sexual orientation? How does being gay leads to bestiality and incest while being straight does not? This country has only had mixed-sex marriage and yet there are no end of those who have sex with animals and those who have sex with their relatives. How on earth did same-sex marriage cause this when there hasn't been same-sex marriage? Are you saying that same-sex marriage is so powerful that it bend space and time and cause people from 200 years ago to do things they wouldn't normally have done?Why is it that when you think of having sex with someone of the same sex, you immediately start having fantasies of raping your infant sons and their dogs? What is it about thinking of having sex with someone of the opposite sex that stops those fantasies?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

I don't ask for anything more than that.

---

But that isn't true. You keep on saying that only straights should be allowed to get "married"...gay people are only to be allowed "civil union."The fact that you don't call your own past relationships "civil union" indicates you don't believe your own hype.As soon as you start showing sincerity in your own argument, then we'll start believing you.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

They already have the same rights I have.

---

Gays don't have the right to get married.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their households and not be evicted for being gay.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their jobs and not be fired for being gay.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their parenthood and not have their children taken away because the parents are gay.
Gays don't have the right to serve in the military.
Gays don't have the right not to be tortured because they are gay.And it's telling regarding the custody of children, given that you think gays are somehow a harm to children.

quote:

---

The law doesn't say that a gay men can't marry any woman of his choice, just like any straight man.

---

The law doesn't say that a black person can't marry any person of the same race of his choice, just like any white person.If it's a piece of crap when applied to race, why does it suddenly gain legitimacy when applied to sexual orientation?

quote:

---

The law says that any man can marry any woman of his choice. The law does not discriminate against the gay man in that regard.

---

The law says that any person can marry anybody of the same race of his choice. The law does not discriminate against the black race in that regard.If it's a piece of crap when applied to race, why does it suddenly gain legitimacy when applied to sexual orientation?

quote:

---

But, of course, the gay man says he ought to be able to "marry" any man of his choice. I disagree.

---

And you wonder why you keep getting tagged as a bigot.You want to deny others what you want for yourself. That's the definition of bigotry.

quote:

---

That assertion drops in the bin with all the other strange "marriages" people want to have with multiple wives, beasts, siblings, and ghosts.

---

Huh? What does sexual orientation have to do with this? Why is it when you think of having sex with someone of your own sex, you immediately have fantasies of raping your sisters, their dogs, and their ghosts? How does being straight stop these things especially since most people who do that are straight? Is same-sex marriage so powerful that it can bend space and time and make people from 200 years ago do things they wouldn't normally do?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

They already have the same rights I have.

---

Gays don't have the right to get married.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their households and not be evicted for being gay.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their jobs and not be fired for being gay.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their parenthood and not have their children taken away because the parents are gay.
Gays don't have the right to serve in the military.
Gays don't have the right not to be tortured because they are gay.And it's telling regarding the custody of children, given that you think gays are somehow a harm to children.

quote:

---

The law doesn't say that a gay men can't marry any woman of his choice, just like any straight man.

---

The law doesn't say that a black person can't marry any person of the same race of his choice, just like any white person.If it's a piece of crap when applied to race, why does it suddenly gain legitimacy when applied to sexual orientation?

quote:

---

The law says that any man can marry any woman of his choice. The law does not discriminate against the gay man in that regard.

---

The law says that any person can marry anybody of the same race of his choice. The law does not discriminate against the black race in that regard.If it's a piece of crap when applied to race, why does it suddenly gain legitimacy when applied to sexual orientation?

quote:

---

But, of course, the gay man says he ought to be able to "marry" any man of his choice. I disagree.

---

And you wonder why you keep getting tagged as a bigot.You want to deny others what you want for yourself. That's the definition of bigotry.

quote:

---

That assertion drops in the bin with all the other strange "marriages" people want to have with multiple wives, beasts, siblings, and ghosts.

---

Huh? What does sexual orientation have to do with this? Why is it when you think of having sex with someone of your own sex, you immediately have fantasies of raping your sisters, their dogs, and their ghosts? How does being straight stop these things especially since most people who do that are straight? Is same-sex marriage so powerful that it can bend space and time and make people from 200 years ago do things they wouldn't normally do?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Hoot Mon writes:

quote:

---

They already have the same rights I have.

---

Gays don't have the right to get married.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their households and not be evicted for being gay.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their jobs and not be fired for being gay.
Gays don't have the right to be secure in their parenthood and not have their children taken away because the parents are gay.
Gays don't have the right to serve in the military.
Gays don't have the right not to be tortured because they are gay.And it's telling regarding the custody of children, given that you think gays are somehow a harm to children.

quote:

---

The law doesn't say that a gay men can't marry any woman of his choice, just like any straight man.

---

The law doesn't say that a black person can't marry any person of the same race of his choice, just like any white person.If it's a piece of crap when applied to race, why does it suddenly gain legitimacy when applied to sexual orientation?

quote:

---

The law says that any man can marry any woman of his choice. The law does not discriminate against the gay man in that regard.

---

The law says that any person can marry anybody of the same race of his choice. The law does not discriminate against the black race in that regard.If it's a piece of crap when applied to race, why does it suddenly gain legitimacy when applied to sexual orientation?

quote:

---

But, of course, the gay man says he ought to be able to "marry" any man of his choice. I disagree.

---

And you wonder why you keep getting tagged as a bigot.You want to deny others what you want for yourself. That's the definition of bigotry.

quote:

---

That assertion drops in the bin with all the other strange "marriages" people want to have with multiple wives, beasts, siblings, and ghosts.

---

Huh? What does sexual orientation have to do with this? Why is it when you think of having sex with someone of your own sex, you immediately have fantasies of raping your sisters, their dogs, and their ghosts? How does being straight stop these things especially since most people who do that are straight? Is same-sex marriage so powerful that it can bend space and time and make people from 200 years ago do things they wouldn't normally do?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Catholic Scientist:

quote:

---

However, "marriage" is defined as the union of one man and one woman.

---

However, "marriage" is defined as the union of people of the same race.If it's a piece of crap when applied to race, why does it suddenly become legitimate when applied to sexual orientation?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.