Social ***mozilla Firefox ceo forced to resign for personal views****

[ultramanhyata]

Sorry, we can't offer you a marriage license. We do have a Crossbreed Pact if you'd like. It's the same thing, but with a different name. Why a different name? LINGUISTICS, of course. Please pay no attention to the fact that we are also talking about how much we hate the idea of you being together and how you're ruining society. This is totally about linguistics.

You're blind to your own emotional reactionism and lack of objectivity on this issue... Even though you can't restrain yourself from "going there" within a matter of one or two paragraphs.

Are you also offended by the qualifier "same-sex" when it proceeds the word "marriage" when it is necessary to distinguish between gay and straight unions? Why is a qualifier somehow less offensive than a noun?

Or let's consider the word "queer". Gay people have proudly adopted this word for their community. Yet there are plenty of straight people in this country who always use the word "queer" as a pejorative slur.

Does the idea of the same word communicating both something positive and something negative - all depending on the worldview of the person using it - make your head explode?

 

[TheBox]

You're blind to your own emotional reactionism and lack of objectivity on this issue.

I exhibit neither. You avoided my question about the necessity of a separate term AGAIN.

You keep trying to take some "high ground" of objectivity but you can't actually explain why you think you're up there.

Even though you can't restrain yourself from "going there" within a matter of one or two paragraphs.

If you have an issue with my analogy, then state it.

Are you also offended by the qualifier "same-sex" when it proceeds the word "marriage" when it is necessary to distinguish between gay and straight unions? Why is a qualifier somehow less offensive than a noun?

Clearly I'm not, as I've used that term. Removing it renders many sentences confusing. "They're pushing to legalize marriage." What? Marriage is already legal. "Opponents of marriage say it will ruin society." Huh? People oppose marriage in general and think it will ruin society?

We're talking about legal terms. AGAIN, what is the purpose of making a distinction between same-sex and opposite-sex marriages using different legal terms?

If I tell you Joe and Tom got married this weekend, are you going to be confused about what happened? Does telling you they got a civil union instead alleviate the confusion?

I've already established that the reason the alternative term was invented was to view those unions as less than marriages.

 

[m52nickerson]

Are you also offended by the qualifier "same-sex" when it proceeds the word "marriage" when it is necessary to distinguish between gay and straight unions? Why is a qualifier somehow less offensive than a noun?

...because the qualifier is only used when needed. That is not always the case, most of the time you will not need to distinguish between same-sex and oposite sex marriages.

 

[UpaLoompa]

...because the qualifier is only used when needed. That is not always the case, most of the time you will not need to distinguish between same-sex and oposite sex marriages.

Quite. The gay marriage I went to didn't have invitations that said "Please come to our gay wedding", they just said "Please come to our wedding".

 

[TheComebackKid]

We don't call a marriage between two white people one thing and a marriage between two black people something else. Or a marriage of two Christians versus a marriage of two atheists. Old old people versus young people. Or people marrying for love versus people in an arranged marriage. When interracial marriage was allowed, it didn't get a separate legal term.



It's really obvious that the reason for the alternate term is to disparage same-sex unions as inferior.

I mean...they even SAY IT. How many anti-equality spokespeople talk about how allowing gay people to marry will "taint" marriage? They don't want "their" word to be associated with gay people.

Trying to compare ssm to race is comparing apples and oranges. Thats why you rarely get anywhere with it.

 

[TheBox]

Trying to compare ssm to race is comparing apples and oranges. Thats why you rarely get anywhere with it.

It's apples and apples. Most of the crummy arguments against interracial marriages are shared by opponents of SSM.

The argument only fails against people who want to ignore it because they don't like being associated in any way with racists.

 

[m52nickerson]

Trying to compare ssm to race is comparing apples and oranges. Thats why you rarely get anywhere with it.

TheBox spelled it out very well why they are very similar, so it is not apples to oranges.

...nice try!

 

[TheComebackKid]

TheBox spelled it out very well why they are very similar, so it is not apples to oranges.

...nice try!

Nah, I still see a bunch of apples and oranges

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Nah, I still see a bunch of apples and oranges

You see what you want to see.

Then again, you're pro gay marriage, right?

 

[TheComebackKid]

You see what you want to see.

Then again, you're pro gay marriage, right?

Right. But I also support societies right to not recognize it. Its up to society.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Right. But I also support societies right to not recognize it. Its up to society.

Do you realize how incredibly "gray" that is?

Why do you support gay marriage?

 

[TheBox]

Nah, I still see a bunch of apples and oranges

Same principle. People don't approve of it, so they want it to have a different name so they don't have to associate themselves with "those people".

 

[TheComebackKid]

Do you realize how incredibly "gray" that is?

Why do you support gay marriage?

Because I would like to pacify half the country in hopes that it will eliminate one of the many wedge issues we have as a society. Also I have no moral or any other kind of a misgivings about gay marriage. I don't believe it will "ruin society".

 

[TheComebackKid]

Then you should stand by this conviction and support equal rights for ALL citizens.

This isn't an equal rights issue for me. Its an issue of societal preference.

 

[TheComebackKid]

Societal preference made black people ride in the back of the bus and turn a blind eye to lynchings.

Again, apples and oranges

 

[lowsingle]

for people who agree with gays being allowed legal marriage

do you accept incestuous marriage as well? do you think brothers should be able to marry their sisters?

 

[lowsingle]

We are talking about equal rights for all citizens. Apples and apples. Or oranges and oranges. Doesn't matter which.

gays have equal rights already

there are no laws saying that gays cant do anything that straight people are allowed to do

that includes marriages, straight men cant marry men either. they want laws changed to be able to do something that straight people arent allowed to do either

that is different than racist jim crowe laws. where black people couldnt legally do the same things as white people.

 

[lowsingle]

A gay sexual relationship between consenting adults and incest is quite a jump, and it is very telling of where your mind is. What's next? A beastiality argument?

how is it a jump?

theyre both consenting adults who cant breed healthy offspring?

what is the difference, both morally and legally

 

[lowsingle]

Until you can reason as an adult, this conversation is over. Call me when the shuttle lands.

so you dont have a counterargument

its just that you feel one is "wrong" and one is "right"

you cant explain why, so you tell me that i cant reason. but youre the kind of person who champions gay marriage to people who feel the same way, but about a different kind of marriage

 

[Anabolistair]

I'm all for gay marriage and glad it passed in canada so we can Watch the news and ear about another minoritie bitch about first world problems.