same sex marriage
Somebody pass the popcorn. Please?
I'm heterosexual, but I've — thankfully — overcome the prejudices which the Abrahamic religions indoctrinate people with. Crying that homosexuality is 'deviant' is irrational and a denial of the readily-observed spectrum of animal behaviour. Or, are you going to deny that human beings are simply "smart mammals"?
It's no different from asserting coloured people are less-intelligent, or prone to 'sub-human' behaviour, than caucasians.
Your opinion of homosexual acts is what I find "irrational". If you don't like the way the society you live in is developing, then move where your views are acceptable. The tyranny of a minority with a 'dark-ages' mentality is not something I'll accept in my society; nor will the majority in most progressive democracies.
Might I suggest Saudi Arabia as your new home?
Progressivism is itself a disturbing plot from 130 or so years ago. Its fruits include the income tax, abortion on demand, the citizen initiative, genetic purification, and the false theory of separation of church and state. Progressives rallied under the banner of "equality" for women's suffrage -- but only because they felt women were "psychologically" more suited to their social messages. Just FYI.
Where are you living? Abortion on demand? I want to move there! (Well, there is always abortion on demand, even in places where abortion is illegal. They are called illegal abortions. They will happen regardless of whether or not the law says no. As a lover of life, I would prefer abortions remain safe, legal and rare... rather than unsafe, illegal and deadly for mother and child. On the other hand, as a lover of life, I want the government to assist families by improving public transport, having socialized medicine, improving schools, and paying for childcare for working families. This would dramatically reduce the need for elective abortions because of economic reasons.) Alas, I live in a different world from you.
Also, why the hating on men? What do you have against men?
Although on first read I could not understand your statement, "[w]hat do you have against men?", it is possible that you are not familiar with the word "suffrage." This refers not to pain but to voting.
America has killed over 50 million babies in the last 40 years since Roe v. Wade was decided without a single vote from Congress, by nine Supreme Court members who are all dead now.
Communist China has killed over 500 million babies, according to published reports, with its "one child" policy.
Almost half the time an abortion is committed, the child killed is male. So I'm certainly not "hating" on men or women when I posit that one of the offspring of the progressive movement is the notion of abortion on demand (which is not law in the USA as of today, but it is a goal.) The same liberal Supreme Court justices who are happy to consult foreign law when formulating their decisions should probably be aware that only 5 countries out of 193 permit abortion on demand and certainly none of Europe.
But we're talking about perversity in marriage, which we never permitted among Indian tribes wishing to gain citizenship. Likewise. the 1862 Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act banned Mormons from practicing their version of "marriage equality." The Supreme Court has already found that laws banning polygamy are constitutional.
P.S., Please, please, don't tell us that you want to get pregnant solely to have an abortion, just for the experience and/or thrill of it. Yikes.
How many children do you kill every time you masturbate? That is as-ridiculous as most of the fundamentalist opposition to abortion.
Now, this is not to say there is no need for a sane discussion on reducing the point at which elective abortions can be performed; medical science has advanced dramatically since Roe vs Wade, but only misogynistic ideologues demand zero abortion.
I think again we are parsing words because we live in a sound-bite world where the winner of the argument tends to be the one who can hang the best nametag on his team or goal.
Abortion kills human beings. Saying "fetus," which is Latin for baby, instead of "baby," is papering over the issue. Calling it "choice" when a woman decides to terminate her unborn baby's life and "anti-choice" when there are any limits applied, is doublespeak. Saying "marriage equality" instead of "homosexual marriage" or "marriage between two men or two women" likewise is weasel-wording, just as the news media sides against Israel every day by calling Bethlehem and Judea "the West Bank" (which is what Trans-Jordan started calling it in 1948).
I don't demand *zero* abortion, but in modern times there are not many cases where the mother's life is truly in danger and can only be saved by destroying her child. Whereas, those in opposition seem to honestly believe that a twelve-year-old girl should be able to get an government-funded abortion immediately with no questions, no counseling, and her parents don't need to be consulted.
Oh, and FYI, deeming your opposition *insane* comes at the end of a conversation, or at the beginning of a war.
You are the one starting to 'assume bad faith'; my remarks about the quality of debate were not aimed at you. But, at the "ideologue's" position you seem to back.
And I for one am sick of the straight-but-not-narrow B.S. that passes for politically correct these days. Holier-than-thou, meet more-tolerant-than-thou. Except of course that tolerant isn't tolerant if it is intolerant of intolerance. Which it is. And tolerance of vice is no virtue.
I will stipulate that monkeys and many other animal species commit homosexual deeds. They also fling their feces at one another. These acts are not examples of superior behavior.
Of course there are generational shifts in social paradigms. But the assertion that an idea must be good because it is old (appeal to tradition) is no more a fallacy than appeal to modern thinking is a fallacy. Opposing new ideas is a valid exercise! So, why should I move? Why don't *you* move?
Ah, memetic warfare!
Ideas are beautiful and fragile things; attack people, not ideas.
And if you think that's an incitement to violence, I've a bridge you might be interested in buying.