Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Sep 18
th, 2017 at 11:48am:
And let me be clear, if I saw an example of someone saying I'm voting yes because of the way the No campaigners are going about things, I'd be as offended and angry about it.
If anyone has an example of that show me, so I can point that out too.
Its the lack of logical clear thinking in that regard that pisses me off, its the lack of logic exhibited in all the slippery slope thinking and mentions of gay agendas etc etc that pisses me off.
There is only onne simple question that people should be thinking about in which to base your answer on. Do you think same sex couples should have equal rights under the law as striaght couples (which currently they do not)
If you think they should, vote yes.
If you think they shouldn't, vote no.
Simple, think of any issue outside of that you're exhibiting poor thinking and logic on this issue.
That wasn't the question asked... there have been several proposals as to how gay marriage could have the same rights without being included in Marriage. Separate but equal...
The concerns I've heard have nothing to do with silly stuff like marrying the gatepost or whatever or some fear of mad semi-lesos in toilets etc - most people simply do not encompass such drivel ideas in any way - but they state simply that gay marriage is not marriage, though they do not object to their having equal rights within a union.
The question didn't say 'equal' - and the inclusion of that word is loading the question. The question was a simple should gay couples be allowed to marry - it didn't mention equality, since the issue is not one of equality, since gays do not currently fit the bill for marriage, but one of inclusion.
The moment you include 'equal' you are stating that they are currently unequal - which is not the case since they hold the same marriage rights under the rules as everyone else
Where's Dr Mengele - make an easy list for the Konzentrationslageren in the future to have gay marriage listed separately....?