[belverron]

Quote by: Logjam Here's what I think you really mean. You want us to adopt homosexual marriage simply because you think it's right. Which, of course, it isn't. You see, you believe to the depths of your soul that homosexual marriage is the right and proper thing so do, and I am equally as adamant against it.

If I've pretended otherwise I apologize.

Quote by: Logjam What you have just said is that we should adopt homosexual marriage because it's right and screw the consequences?

What I am saying is that you should not evaluate the gay marriage case based on your fear of the precedent it would set but based on the merit of the individual case. In other words, deal with the argument, don't just express your fear of what it means if it prevails. That does not invalidate the argument.

Quote by: Dirty Name Not that I care. I just wanted to be the first to tell you that the next round of discussion will be on whether or not you are an intolerant, bigoted homophobe.

Of course he is ^.^

Quote by: Dirty Name Hypothetically speaking, if we all agreed that gay marriage was worthwhile and that gay couples were in fact worthy of equal status, but we also all agreed that incest is not worthy of equal status, how do we argue legally against incestuous marriage when we already demonstrated a willingness to lower the "equality" threshold to accomodate gay marriage?

Polygamy is related, but I don't think that incest can be classified in quite the same way. I do see where you're coming from.