About curious2

curious2

Follow
Befriend (4)
137 threads
5,177 comments
male
Followed by 1
Following 0
Ignored by 7
Ignoring 0
Ignore curious2
Registered Mar 17, 2012

"Grumpy Cat makes two appearances in the name of marriage equality -- because everyone deserves the right to be married and miserable"

curious2's most recent comments:

  • On Sun, 28 Jun 2015, 6:40pm PDT in Supreme Court says Constitution gives gay people right to marry, curious2 said:

    Strategist says

    Who says the number "2" is superior to any other number.

    2 is greater than 1, and less than 3. 2 is not generally called superior or inferior, unless you are talking about a vertical stack. The issue in this case was the marriage of 2 gay people had been called legally inferior to the marriage of 2 straight people, which meant the people involved must be inferior also: children of a lesser god dreaming of a lesser dream. Anyway, you can repeat yourself if you want to, or venture further from math if you want to, I'm done.

  • On Sun, 28 Jun 2015, 6:25pm PDT in Supreme Court says Constitution gives gay people right to marry, curious2 said:

    Strategist says

    Yes, they court did say that?

    What? Have you been smoking with the Captain?

    Strategist says

    But does it have to be illegal for willing adults to get married to multiple people?

    It isn't illegal, but only the first marriage would be recognized. You can argue that should change, and the Moronic Cult used to argue precisely that. They lost that argument, though they can try again if they want. I express no opinion, other than it's clearly a different argument.

    Different arguments can have some congruities and overlap, but also differences. 3>2, so that's a difference. You can say 2=2, but you can't honestly say 3=2. Part of the process of debate involves recognizing both similarities and differences between arguments. I recognize the 1967 SCOTUS decision upholding inter-racial marriage was not exactly the same as the 2015 SCOTUS decision upholding same-sex marriage, but I count the differences as progress in fulfilling the equal protection of the laws, i.e. 1=1 and 2=2. You can find overlap regarding commitment and religion and so on, but you can also find differences, and the overlap does not diminish the differences.

  • On Sun, 28 Jun 2015, 6:13pm PDT in Supreme Court says Constitution gives gay people right to marry, curious2 said:

    I respect the libertarian argument that the government should be minimized and ideally not even involved, but I respect more your quotation from de Tocqueville about rights being for either everyone or no one.

    mell says

    redefined

    Ugh. They didn't redefine anything. Same-sex couples have been getting married for millenia, although the so-called "traditional" definition reflects the most common experience. Most people are right-handed and a "traditional" handshake connects the right hands of two people; some people are left-handed and there is no law precluding them from shaking hands with their left. Senator Bob Dole (R-KS) used his left hand, having injured his right arm during WWII. Two people shaking hands would still constitute a handshake, regardless of whether it involves two right hands or two left.

    mell says

    I don't like the consequences of this decision, further cementing marriage as a government-sponsored privilege.

    You seem to misunderstand the consequences of the decision. Marriage was already a fundamental right. SCOTUS invalidated anti-miscegenation laws in 1967 (Clarence Thomas wouldn't be married to his Heritage Foundation consultant bride without that right), and subsequent decisions spanning decades recognized marriage as a fundamental right. A marriage license is not like a driver's license, which SCOTUS has called a privilege.

home   top   share   link sharer   users   register   best of   about   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net