Well, that is what is meant by LGBT rights - making the rights of LGBT people the same as the rights of others. We have full equality here now. Before we had same sex marriage, that was a right that was lacking. Now it isn't.
-
-
Threading and timing has got me lost. What does this question follow? Can you quote a brief snippet for context?
-
If you think marriage is benefit for the smooth running of society, why deny it to same sex couples? Won't they do better in committed relationships? Won't their children benefit from their parents being married? (In your view?)
-
(Gimme a sec, I want to respond in order so that we can keep our ducks straight.)
-
I'm not really interested in arguing about same sex marriage any more. It's been done to death and the battle has mostly been won.
-
OK, fine. This is the first time I've engaged in it. To me, your positions are based on feelings, not rational consideration. You've left me unpersuaded. But if you want to end it, that's fine, I'll respect that.
-
You don't need to be persuaded. There is no rational reason for denying same sex couples the right to marry. It doesn't affect you in any way.
-
There is, but you've told me that you didn't want to continue the conversation. And if conversation is not about exchange and persuasion, then what is it for? I think that it does affect me, that I'm willing to discuss it. But that's your choice, and that's fine.
-
I've just had the conversation too many times. It's tedious. I do think marriage is an emotional thing - about loving commitment - rather than a rational one - linking families or producing children to run your farm - now but that doesn't make equal rights irrational.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.