So far Pale, you haven't done anything rational to prove your point about not letting homosexual people marry except try to extend a tradition based in the patriarchal religions. A tradition that was not embraced universally by any means in the other religious traditions in human history. "We've always done it this way," is not a rational argument, it's an argument for the status quo.
As long as you are supporting the status quo why don't you admit that women have never been allowed to vote in any of the previous democratic states? I never said there was anything inherent in democracy that would bar women from voting but it IS traditional, just like your position on marriage.
I'm glad that your personal attacks on me aren't personal attacks, Pale, I'd hate to think that you would stoop so low--Hell, torturing people is a very high-minded enterprise and could never be considered a "personal attack" by a rational, non-Catholic scientist.
Yeah, yeah, bleat like a sheep. We used to live in a representative republic but nowadays we have more of a mobocracy than even a democracy, but we bill ourselves somewhat disingenuously as "bringing democracy to the world".
Denial is not a rational defense, Pale, and when you support laws, customs, and traditions that are based in religion that condemns people for innate qualities
that feels like hate to the people on the receiving end. I know you don't want to look at it that way, you want to see yourself as a saviour torturing for the safety of the millions, but the poor bastard you are cutting into tiny pieces because you THINK he might have information is going to feel your HATE. When you denigrate people, deny them Constitutional rights, and promolgate a religious-based agenda it comes across as hateful.
Poor Pale, you just can't figure it out. It isn't Catholics, it's anybody ethically retarded enough to support a religion that has been killing themselves and others for nearly 2000 years over "interpretations" of scribbles in books and tribal god images. You're claiming to be a scientist, but yet you've only used religious tradition to support your position. Don't blame me because YOU look like a Catholic, I don't write your silly posts.
You write stuff that is taken directly out of the red-neck playbook, you are a bigot or at least you manage to write like one, what am I supposed to think? In the future try to make a point instead of letting religious doma speak for you. So far no one has brought forward a compelling reason to prevent homosexual people from enjoying all the legal benefits associated with marriage in this country and enshrined in US law. Personally I wish all you religious people would take "marriage" back to your church where you can protect it from queers and that there would be a civil union law like they have in the European Union that confers all the legal rights to all consenting adults. Then, once you have the legal part done you can repair to whatever house of worship you choose and have some ol' time religion troweled onto your union, but it will have no more legal standing than a baptism currently does. This would allow small-minded people like the pale bigots to save the word "marriage" and thus still feel special.
How about all the other rights denied to homosexual people, Pale? Do you think we should continue to deny them all the other things too, or is it just marriage that gets your undies all inflamed?
And why don't you work on your tan so that you don't have to be the pale Rider?
