1 - 10 Next
The height of arrogance ....
What do you mean ... false dilemma? If a state accepts same-sex marriage, then is it OK? If 20 states? 30? Or more? Will you say ... so be it .... or will you call for federal legislation to negate the states' decision. It is not a logical fallacy ... nor is it a false dilemma. It is ... political reality. Will you accept the decision of a state to legitimize same-sex marriage? Calling it a fallacy ... a false dilemma ... is a dodge.
OK. You are now on the record. It is expected, therefore, that you will applaud states' rights ...
How many states no allow same-sex marriage? How many?
What psydoc said ... Jewish (where did that come from) ... psychopathy? Do explain. There is an old film called "Paper Chase" ... about first year law students at an esteemed university. The prof calls on a 1L .... and says to him..... "Fill the room with your wisdom." Carlos, please do that. Do elaborate of "Jewish psycopathy."
So, quick question -- do you advocate using the power the national government to suppress what you consider as evil? Yes or no?
What? How do you know it is least studied? Geez. Not honestly studied? Where do you get this stuff? Do you make it up? Fabricate? Statements like those deserve careful documentation which you, obviously to those on both sides, failed to do.
So, for you, WJF. This is a most interesting question. You have argued against same sex marriage and argued it conveys numerous "rights" (I read your post). Now ... the question. What if states grant those rights within their boundaries? Would you argue that federal power should be used to negate the grant? If so, you advocate over riding states' rights. If you would not use federal power, then you admit that states have the right to define marriage as they see fit .... through their legislatures ... through their state court system. In other words, you have maneuvered yourself into an argument in which you either have to (a) assert federal power over the states and contradict your "limited government" principles [or else make an exception, in which case, you are on a slippery slope] or (b) admit the definition of marriage is left to state and local governments ... under the 10th Amendment ... in which case, you have to willing to accept the decision made by the states. Which is it?
Most Christians ... ahhh Carlos ... one of the most influential theologians of the time in your mind ... you pontificate on "most Christians?" There is a word for that .... hubris.
The national government? Are you advocating that kind of power to the national government? Surely, it is unique in the history of Darby O'Gill advocating governmental power. Or did I misread?
1 - 10 Next