Evidence for Creationism and Against Evolution

[Blackheart]

"The Supremes have formally stated a majority opinion that they believe homosexual marriage is a right of US citizens?
Would you please provide the reference? I don't recall any formal statement about that."

Nor would you. They don't issue formal statements on cases that haven't been brought before them...
Go look up the history of related rulings in similar cases however, if you want to know.

"No it's not - and it looks like you're resorting to name-calling now because you can't refute my point using logic or valid examples."

Name calling? No, just telling you that your tactic of rehashing the same statements over and over again is.. cute. I'm pretty sure your point has already been refuted...

"There's no way around the fact that many, MANY people believe that a marriage should be defined as a union between a man and a woman, and this is their honest opinion on what is right and good for people. And you can't support the claim that it is an inherent right."

I already did. You can choose to ignore it, or disagree with it, but it has been done, and laid out. I'm sure that if I had missed anything, some other helpful mooter would have gladly jumped on it to point out any flaws.

"Now other people honestly believe differently, and that's their right. And BOTH SIDES have the right to vote their conscience on the issue. And it's bully tactics, IMO, as well as unfair, for one side to call the other side names, when it's a matter of opinion."

You are protesting way too much. If I was going to call you names, I wouldn't be unclear about it at all. All I've done is point out where your statements are aligned with certain types of thinking.

"What, specifically, do you think is "mumbo jumbo", BTW? The part that you can't logically refute?"

No the part where you continue to state the idea that majority opinion is pertinant to the merits of the case, even though it's been clearly pointed out to you that it doesn't matter. It won't matter unless it's put to a vote, in which case all you are saying is might makes right, which I doubt I have to point out the fallacious nature of such thinking.

"..... I have a deep respect and regard for people, and the way I vote reflects that."

You and I definately have different ideas on what is discriminatory, I'll grant you that.

"But that was never the issue. I doubt if my right to vote was ever in question; was it?"

You're the one who took the martyr stance, and stated that I was infringing upon your right to vote your opinion. So you tell me.

"I don't know that I feel like getting into my reasons behind "why", because I don't have the energy to support a minority (on THIS board) opinion right now. I've stated some of my opinions before on the homosexual thread, if you feel like doing a search."

I didn't think so. No, I don't feel like going to look.

"My ONLY interest in THIS particular discussion was discussing the illogical and inappropriate use of the word "intolerant" to label a person that happens to disagree, in all good conscience, with the minority opinion that the definition of marriage should be expanded to include homosexual unions."

Well, you've failed to convince me I'm afraid. In fact, I can tell that the discussion was a total waste of time, becasue you are still saying marriage instead of civil contract... Eventually someone's going to force the issue of the establishment clause with regards to marriage, and the issue will come to the front.

"You're the one that has run out of logical arguments, apparently. "

Again, we obviously live in different realities.... I'm not even sure we think of logic in the same way...