Gay Marriage: Should It Be Allowed?

I wonder whether this psychiatric syndrome has yet a name.

 

Guerilla, you say:

But honest to god, I've never understood how you can condemn this, and at the same time, take this stand, respecting the move to coerce Wiki to alter the content of its own site:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/removal-of-the-pics-of-muhammad-from-wikipedia


It basically came down to:

"Free market of thought." What does this actually mean to you, concretely?

 

I know. I wish you could understand it. We would have had totally different discussions.

Not to be condescending, but if you didn't get the rest, how do you expect to get this?

 

This is your response? Tossing in terms borrowed from rhetoric, and avoiding a couple of simple questions?

First simple question:

How can you say this:

And at the same time offer your support to the wiki petition, which was this:

How do these two things go together?

Second simple question:

You don't have to answer, Guerilla - if you'd rather just avoid the questions, that's fine, but please don't attempt to play the card that what you have had to say is such abstruse wisdom, a viewpoint of such profundity, that it's just somehow beyond me, or anyone else, for that matter; the attempt is just silly. These are sincere and simple questions. Bottom line, I've never understood the disconnect between your publically stated views in this area, and your support for the wiki petition.

 

Like I said before this thread just keeps on going downhill. WTF is up with the holocaust on the gays remark by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Jr. It's one extreme to the other.

 

The only thing I am avoiding, is triggering another NorthPointBanMe episode, which quite honestly, you should probably appreciate my position on that.

I started answering, and then saw that you aren't interested in answers, just in reprimanding me or requesting self-censorship.

I will attempt whatever I please.

Because you have misrepresented my position on the wiki position, to the point where you have actually told me what I believe, rather than allowing me to express and define my own beliefs. The entire scenario is ludicrous. Then again, the stunt that was pulled in the FLDS thread where gworld and I were accused of being pro-rape was also ludicrous. Or that I am some kind of bigot because I don't support the CRA of '64. It's endless.

Again, until you can understand where I am coming from, and what I mean, it's pointless to try and rationalize my positions to you. You seem to be one of, if not the only, person on this forum who has such a hard time accepting where I stand and why.

 

I'm aware your answer constituted a non-answer, hence my post above.

In terms of reporting posts, Guerilla, as I have been equally dinged on the thread in question, and other threads where you and I have traded barbs, please don't attempt that card as well.

You may characterize your wiki stand however you wish. A plethora of people disagree, as do I, and this is based on your words, your stance, no one else's - you cannot advocate a support for censoring Wiki - a blatant attempt to impose one's personal morality on a website enjoyed by all - and at the same time cry foul here on the same ground:

It isn't possible for the two worldviews to coexist. However, I posed a good faith question, believing you were prepared to speak to the apparent divergence. I see the answer is no, you aren't prepared. Again, fine.

The polygamy thread, the church/state separation thread, the issue of racial segregation and your support of same via a misapplication of constitutional law, the whatever thread - you seem to take issue with an actual debate. Which is fine, and as evidenced here, as I expected.

That's embarrassingly untrue, Guerilla. If you honestly believe this, I simply feel a measure of pity, to be truthful.

 

There are a plethora of people who disagree with me? I can only assume by your statement, that you're willing to name names. So please have at it.

This is the same stunt you pulled with d16man and webby. Either you're lying, or you're about to betray someone's trust. So which is it? Are you a liar or a sellout?

Dude, I feel a measure of pity that you're going to buy a camera with the money you are borrowing against children's future earnings. If you had any self-respect, you would earn what you spend, not take from others.

As far as the answers you seek, my position remains that you are not interested, or perhaps even capable of comprehending my take. Maybe you can get one of your plethora to come out from the shadows, and ask me.

 

Names of people who disagree with your position? Which issue? For starters, literally off the top, Wisdomtool? Rebecca? Earlpearl? Stox? Kaethy? Cientificoloco? Grim? Iul? Lord, many, many others. Do you really need more, for now? These alone sorta put a hole in the theory:

Do they not? You know, it's actually O.K. to be disagreed with. For a guy who continually bellows the refrain that he stands on principle, that this forum "isn't a popularity contest," you sure seem to dodge to Plato's cave when it comes to believing you simply can't be wrong, or that folks may disagree, even vehemently disagree, with many of your points.

Calling me a liar, or a sellout, is again just needless personal attack, Guerilla. Nothing new, but this is what it always comes to, in the end, after merely avoiding the issue at hand.

I will gladly relieve you of your guilt in receiving the rebate, the "largesse from others." I will provide a mailing address to send the check to.

 

They disagree with which position?

You're just pulling names randomly from people I debate. I don't recall discussing the CRA with half of those people. Or the Mohammed on Wikipedia thing.

Cowardly way out of a lie if you ask me.

It wasn't a personal attack. You did sell out Webby, and I wanted to know if your statement was the truth or not. Someone who lies, is a liar. Someone who betrays a confidence is a sellout.

You were either going to sellout, or lie. It looks like you elected to do the latter, again.

It's the largesse of your kids. I have no respect for a man who takes government "handouts" that are produced at the expense of their children's future earnings, blows that on cheap foreign consumer goods, and then asks for more. In fact, it's disgusting and amoral to steal from others, you actually steal from your own kids.

 

Good lord. Wisdom, separation of church and state, wiki; Rebecca, wiki, polygamy; Iul, laws and society; stox, everything; earl, far as I can tell, everything; cientifico, take a look up; Grim, separation of church and state; kaethy, polygamy. These are literally off the top. You do realize that by saying:

You are attempting to construct a false reality, namely, that no one (but myself), disagrees with you? "Dude," time to check in to what is actually being said on this forum.

I don't really care your reasoning as to why you feel free to call me a liar or a sellout, or a thief of my child's future. You're wrong, on all scores, and as I told your pal Gworld, were we to speak in person, I'd be very happy to "discuss" this with you directly. However, this is a forum, with rules, and you are not free to attack me personally. I understand this is what you have in lieu of a credible point, but I'm telling you - knock it off.