Serapheart said:
Certaintly you have no right to define it then, so we should all leave it alone, eh? You know, the way it was/is... But seriously arguing with you about this would be pointless. The internet isn't the right place for this kind of arguing, you are on the complete opposite side of an extremely contraversial debate. I can see now that any hopes of me trying to convince you (or vise versa) would be completely futile. Not here at least. The topic at hand however, that I can argue with. It's the original topic, one that we have strayed from. Is Miss California a victim for believing that marriage is meant for a man and a woman? No she is not, and many are hypocrites to say that she is. Normally I would say "God help us all", but I've come to believe that God waits until a nation is completely wrought with sin before he steps in to destroy it, and rather than make the people do "his will" he watches his Christians fight and fail for it. All so that he can judge a nation more harshly. So if you want me to stop going against gay marriage you never will. As long as I'm alive there will be a outspoken contender of such an atrocity. But what i'm asking is that we at least be fair and equal. Doesn't she have the right to be Christian? So doesn't she have the right to be raised and believe in that christian value of proper marriage? This trully is a terrible, terrible world. |
I'm not trying to concince you of my side, I really just have an interest in the oppositions logic, and would like to learn how it makes sense to them. I strive for understanding.
Now if your argument is religious, I can easily understand it even though I highly disagree with it. Your book says it's wrong. But with secular arguments, anti-gay marriage people don't seem to have any logic, all they seem to do is use the "appeal to tradition" fallacy.
Anyone has the right to believe in anything they want, and follow any traditions they want, but they can't force it upon others if it's unfair.
