is there anyone else who is pro-life AND pro-gay rights, or is it just me?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by 34958hq439-qjw9v5jq298v5j

I just really don't like the idea that some posters have that Christians who vote down gay marriage are hateful, ignorant, fearful people that beat their wives and molest their children. The problem with any political internet discussion is that like 95% of the people who discuss political are liberal and anti-religion; so it just becomes one big circlejerk where you can say hateful things like that and nobody ever calls you out. Frankly it makes me sick.

If you're refering to Sarcasmo's posts, I didn't take what he wrote as saying "Christians who vote down gay marriage are hateful, ignorant, fearful people that beat their wives and molest their children". Especially when he clearly stated that he himself is a religious married man, and I doubt he categorizes himself as the above. I just understood it as pointing out the glaring faults in viewing same sex marriage as a threat to the institution of marriage when there are already plenty of straight people out there as we speak who are trashing marriage, and that we ought to be worrying about instead. Basically, why is a same sex couple considered a threat when there ARE so many straight folks out there (religious or not) adding to the incredibly high divorce rates of today, being abusive to their spouses or children, etc. If opponents really want to "defend marriage", then perhaps that's where they should focus their attention.

Originally Posted by 34958hq439-qjw9v5jq298v5j

Since when does not understanding a minority group's issues well justify stripping them of civil rights? So if there's a minority group that loved goats should they be allowed to marry one?

Okay, I'm going to ask you to justify this stunning leap in logic before I reply to it - especially since it's a comment that's already been addressed in my past few posts.

Originally Posted by 34958hq439-qjw9v5jq298v5j

It's not a civil right for gays to get married. In fact, I would argue that marriage is an institution and not a civil right at all. It's no more a civil right than getting a drivers license is. Of course, you can bring up the inter-racial thing too; okay, so even then, I wouldn't say not allowing me to marry a black girl is necessarily stripping me of a right; it's just a right that doesn't exist yet. Of course you could argue that way the institution is defined is unfair. But I just don't see it as "not allowing gays their rights", when they're talking about something that would radically change the definition of marriage.

You seem to have a different definition of civil rights than I do. Part of the generally accepted definition includes "the rights to full legal, social, and economic equality" - primarily for blacks when first instituted, but it applies to many groups (excluding goat fuckers of course, because among other things, that's an issue of beastiality and being in a relationship with a party that's unable to express it's thoughts and desires).

And the simple fact is that the rights regarding marriage do exist, which is why those who penned, backed, and voted for prop 8 in California felt it necessary to actually create a constitutional amendment that specifically prohibited same sex couples from being able to marry. So they were very literally and actively stripped of their constitutionally guaranteed right to "social equality".

Since we're at the point where you're actually asking me to defend my position against goat fuckers - which I did in my parenthetical above incidentally - I'd like to ask you a question, and I'd really appreciate a serious answer. Keeping in mind what we've already discussed, what are the good, logically sound, non-discriminatory arguments against same sex marriage in your opinion, and why?