Post by Ranger Joe on Dec 14, 2011 0:33:21 GMT -5
To people who make the huge leap that if we legalize gay marriage it will open the doors to all sorts of ridiculous things like marrying your toaster, children, the dead or your dog.
1: This is Adam. He is a male adult capable of making his own decisions. If you met him on the street you would assume he could get married.
2: This is Evelyn. She is capable of making her own decisions. If you met her on the street you would assume she could get married.
Adam and Evelyn met, fell in love, and eventually decided they wanted to get married to each other.
The United States government recognizes them as a married couple and gives them certain benefits. The church has zero say in the matter. If you doubt this fact, then consider all the Atheists, Pagans and other religious people get that get legally married every day in the United States.
Now let's move on...
This is Adam. He is a male adult capable of making his own decisions. If you met him on the street you would assume he could get married.
This is Chris. He is a male adult capable of making his own decisions. If you met him on the street you would assume he could get married.
Adam and Chris met, fell in love, and eventually decided they wanted to get married to each other.
The United States government doesn't recognize them as a married couple and denied them certain benefits. The church still has zero say in the matter. The US Government is denying its citizens the same rights that it grants other citizens. That is unconstitutional.
That is unequality, the following is not:
This is Adam. He is a male adult capable of making his own decisions. If you met him on the street you would assume he could get married.
This is a toaster. It isn't capable of making decisions at all. It is unable to consent to anything. It is an inanimate object. It isn't a citizen of the United States.
Adam and his toaster can't decide to marry each other since a toaster can't make decisions. Adam doesn't get to give consent twice just because he owns it.
The United States doesnt need to recognize Adam and his toaster in order to recognize Adam and Chris. Denying rights and benefits to some citizens that you grant to others is unequal, unconstitutional, and wrong. Marriage between two people who love each other and are consenting adults should not be denied in the eyes of the government.
Additional not like gay rights examples..
This is Billy. He is ten years old and legally cannot make or comprehend life changing decisions. He might feel love, but he isn't an adult yet.
This is a corpse. It, much like the toaster, can't make decisions. It has become inanimate. It may have once been a citizen of the US, but it isn't any longer.
This is a dog. It could possibly feel love the way we do. However, it isn't aware of it's decisions. It can't consent and isn't a citizen.
Hopefully, Gay Rights make more sense.
(Not like any of you need this explanation, but maybe it will make it even easier to annihilate the "Slippery Slope Fallacy" that Fundies throw out all the time.
***Edited to correct grammatical idiocy
1: This is Adam. He is a male adult capable of making his own decisions. If you met him on the street you would assume he could get married.
2: This is Evelyn. She is capable of making her own decisions. If you met her on the street you would assume she could get married.
Adam and Evelyn met, fell in love, and eventually decided they wanted to get married to each other.
The United States government recognizes them as a married couple and gives them certain benefits. The church has zero say in the matter. If you doubt this fact, then consider all the Atheists, Pagans and other religious people get that get legally married every day in the United States.
Now let's move on...
This is Adam. He is a male adult capable of making his own decisions. If you met him on the street you would assume he could get married.
This is Chris. He is a male adult capable of making his own decisions. If you met him on the street you would assume he could get married.
Adam and Chris met, fell in love, and eventually decided they wanted to get married to each other.
The United States government doesn't recognize them as a married couple and denied them certain benefits. The church still has zero say in the matter. The US Government is denying its citizens the same rights that it grants other citizens. That is unconstitutional.
That is unequality, the following is not:
This is Adam. He is a male adult capable of making his own decisions. If you met him on the street you would assume he could get married.
This is a toaster. It isn't capable of making decisions at all. It is unable to consent to anything. It is an inanimate object. It isn't a citizen of the United States.
Adam and his toaster can't decide to marry each other since a toaster can't make decisions. Adam doesn't get to give consent twice just because he owns it.
The United States doesnt need to recognize Adam and his toaster in order to recognize Adam and Chris. Denying rights and benefits to some citizens that you grant to others is unequal, unconstitutional, and wrong. Marriage between two people who love each other and are consenting adults should not be denied in the eyes of the government.
Additional not like gay rights examples..
This is Billy. He is ten years old and legally cannot make or comprehend life changing decisions. He might feel love, but he isn't an adult yet.
This is a corpse. It, much like the toaster, can't make decisions. It has become inanimate. It may have once been a citizen of the US, but it isn't any longer.
This is a dog. It could possibly feel love the way we do. However, it isn't aware of it's decisions. It can't consent and isn't a citizen.
Hopefully, Gay Rights make more sense.
(Not like any of you need this explanation, but maybe it will make it even easier to annihilate the "Slippery Slope Fallacy" that Fundies throw out all the time.***Edited to correct grammatical idiocy
