- Joined
- Oct 22, 2012
- Messages
- 32,516
- Reaction score
- 5,321
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
I still can't fathom why anyone would care that two people of the same sex would want to marry. It doesn't affect me one iota, and gays have the PRIVILEGE along with everyone else to be miserable, so let them get hitched.
fixed it for you.
Whatever, You can call it corned beef hash for all I care. There is zero reason besides bigotry and some moral authoritarian power trip in telling consenting adults that they can't enjoy a privilege that others can. If Peter want to marry harry then so what? Let em' marry till their hearts content.
but there is a difference between a right and a privilege........this is causing problems because people do not understand that difference.
Whatever. Why shouldn't two consenting adults that happen to be of the same sex be able to enjoy the same privilege? Were blacks told that riding on a bus was a "privilege" so don't complain about taking a seat in the back?
you seems to want to debate emotional context of things....i debate law.............so our statements have nothing in common then..
Laws change. If this were 1965 would you be arguing against interracial marriage because it was against the law?
Why shouldn't two consenting adults of the same sex be able to marry one another? This is a civil rights issue and the winds are blowing in the right direction.why is it when a person say marriage is not a RIGHT.......its assumed a person is against SSM?
marriage is a privilege, it not a right.....its a privilege of government.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
Why shouldn't two consenting adults of the same sex be able to marry one another? This is a civil rights issue and the winds are blowing in the right direction.
i dont know why
BUT
civil rights = privileges under constitutional law
they are not rights.
End result of this difference: zero.
wrong, a right and a privilege are a big difference.
privileges come from government ,and they must honor them...not people or business.....which is why a privilege requires an action from government.
a right only requires it not be hindered when exercising it.
which is why marriage is not a right.....because it does not require an action.
I said "result," not "significance of your differentiation." In other words, your choice of terminology is irrelevant -- it has no impact on real word events.
false, and rights cannot be infringed upon....meaning government cannot hinder its exercise.......a privilege is granted by the government...... and it can have strings attached to it to receive it.
Name for me one real world result (within this topic) where what you're talking about has had an impact in the real world. Not in theory, not in semantics...the real world.
if you have a......is it illegal to infringe on it........yes it is
but a privilege is not a right, privileges are dispensed by government, and they can come with strings attached to them, ..meaning if you wish to receive the privilege then you might have to meet the qualifications to get it.
rights..... do not have a qualifying factor
Do you know what "real world impact" means? Because so far the concept has been going right over your head.
point blank to you...........you are calling a "privilege" given has given to you by government "a right"............and exercising a "privilege of government"................ on other citiznes, as a right.
Tell it to a Federal judge.
again i ask a simple question, ...do you believe government can grant you a right........which violates my rights?
No, and that's why votes for bans against ssm are being continually ruled unconstitutional.
wrong......
Wrong? They're not being ruled unconstitutional? Have I been reading the Onion all this time?
if you have a......is it illegal to infringe on it........yes it is
but a privilege is not a right, privileges are dispensed by government, and they can come with strings attached to them, ..meaning if you wish to receive the privilege then you might have to meet the qualifications to get it.
rights..... do not have a qualifying factor
by calling a privilege..... a right, this confuses things....and in essence says that you can have a privilege, but exercising it like a right. at the expense/labor of another citizen, if you meet government's qualification.
government cannot grant you a privilege, at another citiznes expense or labor.
i didn't say the judgement action was wrong.
its wrong, in meaning its a "right".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?