South Africa's high court approves gay marriage

[Flint]

I get it, you're a robot. It's nothing new. (Please note: that doesn't actually work.) There's nothing left to do here but crack jokes, because you're only willing to discuss the issue within a framework you've set up, which is oh-so-conveniently favorable to your own pre-determined position. [/thread]

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

If you do not base your decisions on an evaluation of the underlying principles then you have made no thought about it at all.

Except you have obviously not done so, as the unspecified principles you use against polygamy do not apply to gay marriage or you wouldn't have needed to mention polygamy.

I turn the burden of proof back on you to convince me that there is a logical reason why I should agree with you without appealing to emotions or flights of fancy.

Because there are positives for some, and negatives for none. Therefore there is net benefit.

[Aliantha]

9th I've done quite nicely for myself with regard to my life thanks. My decision processes are broken down into manageable pieces. That way I don't get one issue confused with another.

You should try it some time mate.

[Aliantha]

And one final word of advice for you.

You are the baby here. You're in college (2nd year I believe?).

Trust me, the reason you're being given so much leaway on this topic is because practically everyone who goes into tertiary education goes through the same process you're going through now.

You'll grow out of it. (if not, God love us!)

[DanaC]

9th.....romantic 'Love' is to a large extent a concept that we have developed in order to rationalise our sexual drives. Sexual drives are as basic as it gets, they are powerful and underly much of what makes us as humans tick. You cannot simply dismiss 'love' as not being important in discussions on how human beings regulate their behavior.

Bla, bla, blabity-bla... so, how is gay marriage going to affect you?
You still have not answered this, such a simple question. Stated clearly and specifically, just as yours have been and we have all done you the courtesy of answering you in that manner.
I am beginning to think you have a reading comprehension problem or are rude... perhaps both?

[Flint]

<insert lengthy tangent to obfuscate indefensible postition>

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

Ibram, for the n'th time would you explain how this is sexism? Gay is not a gender. Also, you absolutely cannot remove love from the equation, that's all this is based on. A gay man wants to marry another man because of love (I'm assuming for the sake of argument), otherwise he is free to marry a woman. With love removed it disentigrates into "I wanna do this!", which isn't a valid reason for anything more important than a late night snack. I want some more arguments from Ibram that don't boil down to either "It's sexism!"(unproven) or "It's just WRONG not to!"(is that the best you can do?).

To say "a man can marry a woman, but a woman may not marry a woman", or "a woman can marry a man, but a man can't marry a man" is sexist in every sense of the word. Anything that discriminates based on gender is sexist by definition. Simple as that. To say that any person can not marry who he or she wishes, whether that person is a he or she, is BULLSHIT, and discriminatory to boot.

Originally Posted by Flint

<insert lengthy tangent to obfuscate indefensible postition>

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Ibram

To say "a man can marry a woman, but a woman may not marry a woman", or "a woman can marry a man, but a man can't marry a man" is sexist in every sense of the word. Anything that discriminates based on gender is sexist by definition. Simple as that.

Sexist (sexism) is discrimination based on gender. Saying men may marry but women may not, or vice versa, is sexism. Not allowing same sex marriage, although discriminatory, is not sexism.

[Happy Monkey]

The ban on interracial marriage was racism.