| Your opinion? |
| Good. |
|
39% |
[ 9 ] |
| Bad. |
|
60% |
[ 14 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 23 |
|
| Author |
Message |
gilbert3729
Commander
Joined: 01 Aug 2004
Posts: 390
Location: New England, USA
|
 Fri Aug 27, 2004 9:41 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Five - seveN wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | Alright, you must not have been reading things clearly.
1. We'd have to change the definition of centuries of non-gay marriage.
2. The proper family would be gone.
3. We would have to allow triads, and 4-somes, and 5-somes, and so where does it end? |
1. What the hell do you mean? If you change that definition, so what? Will it hurt you or something? SO WHAT? It's been the definition for a LONG time! It would NOT be good to change it!
Why would changing a definition be bad? I dont understand that concept. 
2. �the proper family`, what does that mean? A married couple with 12 children, he working himself to death, she taking care of the children and being bored to death? There are already so many married couples without children, so what�s your point?
The "proper family" does NOT mean 12 children, for cripse sake! The proper family is a mom and a dad and a child--NOT two moms and two dads.
Proper is a relative term, somethings are "proper" to some people and not to others. This argument is pointless because there isnt a conclusion that everyone can agree upon (its too relative). Personally i dont believe in the idea of a "Proper Family." To me its just this term created by a nervous public to feel more patriotic during the "communist scare."
Ok, sorry about the religious nonsense phrase, it wasn�t meant as an attack. please forgive me  |
|
-------signature-------
Soylent Green is people!!!
John Kerry...
Bringing complete sentences back to the White House.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:57 pm |
|
^I don't know if I should have read that before, but I forgive you.  See, that's what kind of a guy I am. 
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
Five - seveN
Rear Admiral
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 3567
Location: Shadow Moon
|
| Sun Aug 29, 2004 2:05 pm |
|
| gilbert3729 wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | | Five - seveN wrote: | | Republican_Man wrote: | Alright, you must not have been reading things clearly.
1. We'd have to change the definition of centuries of non-gay marriage.
2. The proper family would be gone.
3. We would have to allow triads, and 4-somes, and 5-somes, and so where does it end? |
1. What the hell do you mean? If you change that definition, so what? Will it hurt you or something? SO WHAT? It's been the definition for a LONG time! It would NOT be good to change it!
Why would changing a definition be bad? I dont understand that concept.
2. �the proper family`, what does that mean? A married couple with 12 children, he working himself to death, she taking care of the children and being bored to death? There are already so many married couples without children, so what�s your point?
The "proper family" does NOT mean 12 children, for cripse sake! The proper family is a mom and a dad and a child--NOT two moms and two dads.
Proper is a relative term, somethings are "proper" to some people and not to others. This argument is pointless because there isnt a conclusion that everyone can agree upon (its too relative). Personally i dont believe in the idea of a "Proper Family." To me its just this term created by a nervous public to feel more patriotic during the "communist scare."
Ok, sorry about the religious nonsense phrase, it wasn�t meant as an attack. please forgive me |
|
|
Why can't I write things down so elegantly??? *Because you're Dutch, you know it!* Oh sorry, talking to myself there...
|
|
|
gilbert3729
Commander
Joined: 01 Aug 2004
Posts: 390
Location: New England, USA
|
| Thu Sep 02, 2004 6:04 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | ^I don't know if I should have read that before, but I forgive you. See, that's what kind of a guy I am. |
Thanks Rm...I appreciate that.
-------signature-------
Soylent Green is people!!!
John Kerry...
Bringing complete sentences back to the White House.
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Star Trek �, in all its various forms, are trademarks & copyrights of Paramount Pictures
This site has no official connection with Star Trek or Paramount Pictures
Site content/Site design elements owned by Morphy and is meant to only be an archive/Tribute to STV.com
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
