&The Annoyed Man wrote:I feel bad about his dog, but Rosby is an idiot.
This -
philip964 wrote:I'm sorry a dog died for an irresponsible owners actions.
&The Annoyed Man wrote:I feel bad about his dog, but Rosby is an idiot.
philip964 wrote:I'm sorry a dog died for an irresponsible owners actions.
I didn't invoke god, just asked the question. Because the argument against same-sex marriage is based on the nature of human persons as gendered beings who have a purpose that is derived from that nature.RoyGBiv wrote: If you can't win a debate about secular law without invoking God, you've not won.
So you would have no problem with incest and would argue to repeal the prohibitions against it?RoyGBiv wrote:HOWEVER, when two consenting adults of any stripe decide to commit to a relationship, they should have the Liberty to do so, within the confines of secular law (in this case the age of the parties).
You raise an interesting relationship. On what rational basis do we have for barring polygamy? And by allowing same sex marriage, do we still have this rational basis?cb1000rider wrote:On polygamy: Clearly you've never watched Big Love. More wives = exponentially more trouble. Not worth it!