I just realized that gay marriage isn't an issue of discrimination

[CaptainCool]

you can't lie your way out of this one captaincool. we've caught you state-handed

this thread is bonkers... you should all feel so bad right now^^

[chapels]

who specifically

i think this was a fun time-kill

[Metalmeerkat]

Hell, the entire argument of "I should have something because I want it" is one hell of a slippery slope.

The slippery slope argument is one hell of a slippery slope to fallacies . . .

[Ley]

Ahahaha I love this cx

[Leafblower29]

OP has PhD in troll logic.

[Kahoku]

This post is troll overload.

Heterosexual individuals are allowed to marry those that they love, whereas homosexual individuals cannot. The law discriminates between homosexual and heterosexual marriages only to deny rights to homosexual couples. It's the practical definition of discrimination.

He would have better luck, if he didn't use the Joker avatar too.

[Randy-Darkshade]

It just dawned on me that as a heterosexual I'm not allowed to marry men either. Doesn't that dismiss the idea that gay marriage is a civil rights issue rather than a "let's change the law because it's inconvenient" one? I mean gay couples aren't discriminated against because they're still allowed to marry members of the opposite sex, they don't have any more or less rights than anyone else in that regard.

No, as heterosexual you are choosing not to marry a man. So no, it doesn't dismiss the idea of gay marriage being a civil rights issue. They are not interested in the opposite sex, if they were they wouldn't be gay and wouldn't want gay marriage to be legal.

Examples of discrimination:

You can't join the army because you're gay
You can't avail of the same legal protection as white people because you're black

You forgot to add "You can't marry because you're gay and want to marry a man, not a woman."

I'll use Mary Jane as an analogy. Let's say you live somewhere where it's illegal, in that place it's illegal for everybody. Wanting to smoke pot more than the average person and not being allowed to does not somehow make you a victim of discrimination, because wanting to do something illegal does not make you exempt from laws that govern its legality, otherwise the whole point of the legal system goes out the window because you're letting people who want to break the law break it and only enforce laws against people who don't want to violate those laws and thus don't need enforcing.

The laws are discriminating against gays though. The law is what states gay couples can not get married.

Bringing that back to the gay rights issue, lusting for cocks up your pipe is not somehow a legal ticket for elevated priviledges that allow you to do something I'm not allowed to do (marry dudes), therefore being denied gay marriage is not discrimination on anyone's part because it's equally denied to everybody.

How is it denied to everyone when straight people do not even WANT to marry the same sex

[Ley]

People are taking this seriouslyy

[Randy-Darkshade]

People are taking this seriouslyy

It's a debate ain't it? I know OP is a troll but at least he creates debatable topics.

[Dreaming]

People are taking this seriouslyy

Taking things seriously takes too much effort, man. :v Best to just sit and watch others take it seriously.

[Metalmeerkat]

People are taking this seriouslyy

Trolling is serious beeswax!

[Brazen]

No, as heterosexual you are choosing not to marry a man. So no, it doesn't dismiss the idea of gay marriage being a civil rights issue. They are not interested in the opposite sex, if they were they wouldn't be gay and wouldn't want gay marriage to be legal.

So heterosexuality is an informed decision while homosexuality is an uncontrolled affliction? I don't choose to be interested in women any more than gays choose not to be interested in women, I hate women as anything other than pieces of meat.

You forgot to add "You can't marry because you're gay and want to marry a man, not a woman."

BUT YOU STILL HAVE ALL THE SAME LEGAL RIGHTS AS EVERYONE ELSE, NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO MARRY MEMBERS OF THE SAME SEX, HOW IS IT DISCRIMINATION?

The laws are discriminating against gays though. The law is what states gay couples can not get married.

Show me one law in the first world that says "oh, if you're of a homosexual persuasion you're not allowed to marry". The laws state that only men and women can marry, there's no mention of sexual orientation anywhere in there. Again, wanting something that is currently illegal isn't discrimination if it's equally illegal for everyone. The cannabis argument is semantically correct, the laws state that tobacco is the only substance you can legally smoke, whether or not you want to smoke tobacco is irrelevant, whether or not you'd rather smoke cannabis is equally irrelevant. There aren't any laws that state "oh, you like pot? You're not allowed to consume any controlled substances at all then", it's not discrimination against cannabis enthusiasts or Bob Marley fans.

This argument can be applied to a million other things because the overall logic is the same, when someone is treated the same as everyone else and they want special treatment that's not discrimination. If homosexuals ever get something comparable to a sex offender registry where you're no longer legally allowed to do things that I can do merely because I'm not on the registry THEN that would be discrimination, currently though gays are just throwing a hissy fit over wanting more more more.

[Cyanide_tiger]

Brazen makes the best threads. I do hope this one keeps going, especially since his point here is essentially airtight.

Well played, OP, well played.

[shteev]

*Notices Brazen is the OP*
*Closes tab immediately*

[Hakar Kerarmor]

Brazen is the reason Poe's Law was invented.

[Lobar]

I know this is a Brazen troll thread but how did nobody mention Loving v. Virginia yet.

Prior to that decision everyone had the "equal" right to marry within their own race, but the Supreme Court saw right through that bullshit.

[Brazen]

I know this is a Brazen troll thread but how did nobody mention Loving v. Virginia yet.

Prior to that decision everyone had the "equal" right to marry within their own race, but the Supreme Court saw right through that bullshit.

It was mentioned and it was rebutted, although when you get down to think about it inter-racial marriage isn't discrimination either.

EDIT: It's actually even less discrimination than gay marriage because inter-racial absolutely is an informed decision with no mental illness gray area involved.

[mapdark]

Lots of bullshit and trolling

Could you be more obvious in your trolling , I don't think you've meade it clear enough that you wanted negative reactions!

[Brazen]

Oh god, I can't think of a rebuttal, better use an ad hominem

Could you be more obvious in your torrential butt-bleeding?

[Criminal Scum]

You know Brazen is a good troll when you know he's trolling but still manages to kind of piss you off anyway.

[shteev]

Torrential butt-bleeding.

That's a new one.

[Randy-Darkshade]

So heterosexuality is an informed decision while homosexuality is an uncontrolled affliction? I don't choose to be interested in women any more than gays choose not to be interested in women, I hate women as anything other than pieces of meat.

I never said it was an informed decision, I said marrying the same gender is just like when people CHOOSE to marry the opposite sex. Marriage is not the same as having sex or a sexuality.

BUT YOU STILL HAVE ALL THE SAME LEGAL RIGHTS AS EVERYONE ELSE, NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO MARRY MEMBERS OF THE SAME SEX, HOW IS IT DISCRIMINATION?

Like I said, because it is preventing people who want to marry the same gender from doing so. That itself should be a basic right.

Show me one law in the first world that says "oh, if you're of a homosexual persuasion you're not allowed to marry". The laws state that only men and women can marry, there's no mention of sexual orientation anywhere in there. Again, wanting something that is currently illegal isn't discrimination if it's equally illegal for everyone. The cannabis argument is semantically correct, the laws state that tobacco is the only substance you can legally smoke, whether or not you want to smoke tobacco is irrelevant, whether or not you'd rather smoke cannabis is equally irrelevant. There aren't any laws that state "oh, you like pot? You're not allowed to consume any controlled substances at all then", it's not discrimination against cannabis enthusiasts or Bob Marley fans.

It doesn't say that exactly, but the fact it prevents same sex marriage prevents those who want to marry the same gender from doing so. As I already stated, you don;t choose your sexuality, but you choose who you want to marry. Which is not the same thing.

In all honesty I don;t want to ever get married, to either gender. I personally think it's a waste of time and money. I don't need vows from my partner to prove they love me. Not to mention that these days marriage means shit to most people anyway because marriage does not stop people from cheating on their spouse. So why waste that money getting married just to fork out again on a divorce?

[Lobar]

It was mentioned and it was rebutted, although when you get down to think about it inter-racial marriage isn't discrimination either.

EDIT: It's actually even less discrimination than gay marriage because inter-racial absolutely is an informed decision with no mental illness gray area involved.

SCOTUS disagrees, discriminatory intent is sufficient to run afoul of the Equal Protection clause of the 14th amendment.

A law prohibiting the consumption of fried chicken, watermelon, and collard greens might also "equally" apply to everyone, but it's still discriminatory and unconstitutional on the basis of its obvious intent.

[Brazen]

I never said it was an informed decision, I said marrying the same gender is just like when people CHOOSE to marry the opposite sex. Marriage is not the same as having sex or a sexuality.

So what's the issue? One group chooses one thing, another another, one fights to have their choices legally recognized because they want their choices to be legally recognized. Where's the persecution?

Like I said, because it is preventing people who want to marry the same gender from doing so. That itself should be a basic right.

Look, taxes are important, I agree, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that demanding the government gives you tax breaks on your own terms should be a basic right comparable to the right to safety and the right to employment.

In all honesty I don;t want to ever get married, to either gender. I personally think it's a waste of time and money. I don't need vows from my partner to prove they love me. Not to mention that these days marriage means shit to most people anyway because marriage does not stop people from cheating on their spouse. So why waste that money getting married just to fork out again on a divorce?

I agree, I don't intend to get married either in the foreseeable future. I do however enjoy exploiting the taxpayer, so when I have more free time I intend to lobby the Irish government to recognize single men and women as being both an employable entity and a homemaker at the same time, thus gaining the legal benefits of both and the drawbacks of neither.

Hell, there are a lot of things I'll work towards changing. Why do only hybrid cars get hybrid car tax credits when I emit less carbon emissions from using public transport, why do only women get maternity leaves when as a man I may have my own projects at home that I consider self-realization comparable to having a child and thus would like paid leave for, why is drink-driving illegal when I know I can handle my hard liquor behind the wheel.

Lots of things I'd like to see changed, in none of those cases however do I view myself as a brave martyr fighting against injustice, I recognize the situation for what it is: taking advantage of a lenient government body to take as much as I can.

[Seas]

I loved the part in this thread where it almost got to include zoophilia as well.

It'd be like a double dose of lols.