Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8929 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-24-2019 8:48 PM
25 online now:
AZPaul3, DrJones*, dwise1, Faith, JonF, Tanypteryx (6 members, 19 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,375 Year: 15,411/19,786 Month: 2,134/3,058 Week: 508/404 Day: 23/89 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Landmark gay marriage trial starts today in California
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 229 of 759 (652042)
02-11-2012 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by dwise1
02-11-2012 10:46 PM


I think she's supposed to have waxed eloquent, despite saying she wouldn't.

I didn't find her so.

My first thought was, "Who is Eloquent, and why won't she wax him?"

But I've had a few, so my take may not be reliable.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by dwise1, posted 02-11-2012 10:46 PM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by dwise1, posted 02-11-2012 11:13 PM Omnivorous has responded

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 231 of 759 (652045)
02-11-2012 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by dwise1
02-11-2012 11:13 PM


dwise1 writes:

That's it? Something that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with "the debate"?

Subtle irony?

PPS
Ever hear of sotol?

Hadn't. Googled.

The state drink of Chihuahua and Durango?

Sounds intriguing. I'll check it out.

For medicinal purposes.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by dwise1, posted 02-11-2012 11:13 PM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by dwise1, posted 02-11-2012 11:53 PM Omnivorous has acknowledged this reply

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


(2)
Message 310 of 759 (654090)
02-26-2012 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 309 by Taz
02-26-2012 8:30 PM


I don't want you voting on my rights either.
Interracial marriage and women's suffrage never won a popular vote, and might not now.

Our nation is protected from the tyranny of a majority.

So what?


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 309 by Taz, posted 02-26-2012 8:30 PM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 312 by Taz, posted 02-26-2012 8:54 PM Omnivorous has responded

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 313 of 759 (654097)
02-26-2012 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 312 by Taz
02-26-2012 8:54 PM


Re: I don't want you voting on my rights either.
Taz writes:

Interracial marriage and women's suffrage if put up for a popular vote now will win overwhelmingly, IMHO.

Maybe...the latter certainly if women were allowed to vote for it--which they wouldn't have been prior to suffrage.

Black Americans did not have effective suffrage in 1967 when the SCOTUS changed the interracial marriage landscape, so that probably wouldn't have passed either.

Do you think putting them to a popular vote would be a good idea?

You know, so they'd be real rights.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 312 by Taz, posted 02-26-2012 8:54 PM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 314 by Taz, posted 02-26-2012 9:13 PM Omnivorous has responded

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 315 of 759 (654103)
02-26-2012 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 314 by Taz
02-26-2012 9:13 PM


Re: I don't want you voting on my rights either.
Taz writes:

I've never said it was a good idea to put them up for popular vote. In fact, I've expressed many times on this forum that I don't trust the unwashed masses at all. Don't believe in democracy.

Commie.

Then why is a popular vote for gay rights important?


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by Taz, posted 02-26-2012 9:13 PM Taz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by Taz, posted 02-27-2012 2:16 AM Omnivorous has acknowledged this reply

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 704 of 759 (768636)
09-12-2015 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 696 by Percy
09-12-2015 9:14 AM


Re: Redefining Marriage
I stand by my cartoon.

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence


This message is a reply to:
 Message 696 by Percy, posted 09-12-2015 9:14 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


(2)
Message 705 of 759 (768643)
09-12-2015 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 696 by Percy
09-12-2015 9:14 AM


Re: Redefining Marriage
Percy writes:

This union could later be blessed as marriage by any religion willing to do so. Kim Davis could in good conscience sign these licenses for civil unions that are not marriage.

If you mean all future couples, straight and gay, would involve the state only in obtaining licenses for legally identical civil unions, I am confident Ms. Davis would not sign. Her visceral objection is essentially contagion by equal treatment. That wouldn't change.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence


This message is a reply to:
 Message 696 by Percy, posted 09-12-2015 9:14 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 706 by Percy, posted 09-13-2015 7:38 AM Omnivorous has acknowledged this reply

    
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 1199 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


(5)
Message 711 of 759 (768698)
09-13-2015 8:27 AM
Reply to: Message 708 by Faith
09-13-2015 7:49 AM


Davis redefined marriage as a temporary contract
Faith writes:

It's always been about destroying the institution of marriage...

Kim Davis and I, as thrice-divorced heterosexuals, did our best to destroy marriage, but failed miserably--though she's still trying, while I've hung up my spurs. I think marriage will survive us both.

I could get another license from Ms. Davis without quarrel, even though the Kentucky license application requires me to state how many marriages I've abandoned. Clearly, my second and third marriages, like her second through fourth, contradict God's one-man/one-woman, indissoluble union doctrine.

There is nothing like having skin in the game to liberalize one's position on divorce and adultery. Instead of being stoned as an adulterer, I, too, could hitch up my hypocrisy and hate to a Christian media-martyr wagon. Is this a great country or what?

...and you can find gay activists saying that...

But apparently you cannot.

...in so many words.

Which you will redefine.


"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
-Terence


This message is a reply to:
 Message 708 by Faith, posted 09-13-2015 7:49 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019