how quickly the mob turns to personal attacks and posting childish gif images once out-pointed on a topic
really elevating the discussion :roll:

Ricecrackers brand of argumentation right out of the Chomsky notebook:

"Now turning to the facts, ...."

:oops:

Edited by humbert: 2/3/2014 10:36:37 PM

Dis thread.

Inb4 people use this to strawman anyone against gay marriage... Oh wait.

How have I made it personal? You were the one insisting that I'm gay (not that I see that as a bad thing) and keep insisting I've said Stephen Fry's documentary is the basis of my beliefs when I've only ever said it was a good watch.

And you keep insisting you destroyed me when you didn't as it hasn't changed my view on the issue.

Perhaps you need to take your own advice. Since being destroyed on the topic at hand you've now turned to making it personal. This not exactly the high road of maturity.

:lol: because I've said that's what I've based all my views on?

As I said before, grow up and get your head out of the clouds.

perhaps i need to watch dopey documentaries made by comedians to get educated about places i've never been like you

:lol: ok mate. You haven't obliterated anything, I just didn't want to get into an internet argument.

Obviously it was a good decision as you have some growing up to do.

a wise move, since i've obliterated every one of your positions on this matter

naming calling = bullying in 2014
i'd be careful if i were you, such activities could land you in jail

You MUST be a troll.

:lol: oh god, I'm not even going to argue with you.

And fwiw, I was in no way speaking for "them".

well if you're not a homosexual, then who are you to speak for them?

And there it is right there.

People on this forum just confirming to everybody else that they are nothing but an ignorant, pathetic, insecure homophobe.

Please crawl back under your rocks. The world no longer tolerates your viewpoints.

I'm done here.

Its 2014 FFS.

a) I'm not a homosexual.

b) I wasn't comparing gay rights to racial rights, only using an example of how legal and/or constitutional definitions can and do change over time.


But way to make yourself lose credibility. Someone doesn't agree with your stance on gay rights and suddenly they must be a homosexual.

What does redbull give you then?

who's views?

Of course, until recently homosexuality was bary tolerated.

Doesn't mean we can't change the definition to reflect the views of 2014.

Are you sure about that?

Edited by paladisious: 2/3/2014 01:59:00 AM

it continues to amaze me how you homosexuals equate your plight with racial issues
there is no correlation whatsoever, none

get over yourselves and stop feeling sorry for yourselves and feeling like the world owes you something

you have the same rights as everyone else.

Edited by ricecrackers: 2/3/2014 12:32:29 AM

Aboriginal people were once not included in the Australian census according to the definition in the constitution.

Definitions change over time.

A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it the superficial appearance of being right.

I get it now.

Two gay men shouldn't be allowed to get married because one of them doesn't have a vagina.

Sorry, I don't know what I must have been thinking. My bad.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

that is the worst justification i've ever heard! listen to yourself

its tantamount to saying limiting the definition of a vagina to the woman's anatomy to the exclusion of a man's butthole is a form of discrimination

Limiting the definition of marriage to that only between and man and a woman to the exclusion of all others is a form of discrimination.

In 100 years, people will look back on this time and have great difficulty in understanding why gay people were so poorly treated.

i just outlined that gay people are afforded the same privilege if they so choose, however they want to change the definition of a word

gays are not lawfully discriminated against in any way in this country

So what is a right then?

I would argue it is a right for all humans not to be discriminated against based on gender, sexuality and race.

Allowing straight people the PRIVILEGE of marriage at the expense of gay people is a form of discrimination.

the right not to be judged? are you serious? do you even know what a right is? i'm judged all the time on various measures.. do i need to complain to the UN for that?

the right to privacy? do you think gays have a less right to privacy than anyone else? what the hell have you been reading?

the right to IVF? again thats not even a right

The right to not be judged because they are attracted to people of the same sex, the right to ivf, the right to adopt the right to privacy,