phillyfan26
Blue Crack Supplier
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Messages
- 30,343
U2DMfan said:Now if the USSR banned homosexuality, much less gay marriage perhaps the reasons were totally secular but to use this as a platform to state the legitimacy of secular opposition is pretty hideous.
Now, you aren't endorsing that train of thought but you are propping up an argument based on it. Perhaps you could just admit that using the USSR as an example of what a legitimate secular viewpoint might look like, was a bad idea. You may not mean to say that but you are absolutely implying it.
Here is an idea, lets forget about communist governments that tried to squash freedoms and talk about democracies who actually want to extend all personal liberties to the individual.
So, we have the United States. We have opposition to basic freedoms to one particular group. Gay marriage. Yeah. the faggies, the last bastion of whipping post bigotry.
I ask you, what is the legitimate secular argument against it?
And when you can't come up with one, don't feel bad, neither can Mitt or anyone else.
This is the point where the wall of separation is supposed to stand up for basic freedoms extended out to everyone. If you don't believe they are equal, because of religous dogma or socialist tyranny, it hardly matters. You're painfully wrong.
Exactly.
The bottom line is this:
I don't know any secular who is against gay marriage.
I don't know anyone who is against gay marriage who isn't against it on anything other than religious grounds.