What a shock you lied about what I said. I never said I believed marriage was a right I said people on your side have said that. Can't say I'm surprised though.That marriage is a right for everyone. Marriage isn't a right, the ability to pursue happiness is, of which marriage is a part of, the second part of the lie is that is should apply to "everyone" -- No, just consenting adults. Now that you've been shown to be a liar hopefully you'll recant, I won't hold my breath though.
And you lied about "consenting adults" again because in that quote YOU quoted in the 14th ammendment NO limit on age was ever given.
When you are ready to admit you lied again, let us know.
What a shock you ducked your claim of "consent" again. For the third time you can't hide behind laws that ban some sexual practices and want to tear down laws that deny some sexual practices you like and claim you support "the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men" which you claim to abide by in your narrow view of the 14th amendment.[/I][/COLOR]
You had it right in the first sentence, now we're back to you having no clue about consent, or have you suddenly forgot that there's an age of consent? Of course you haven't, just another stupid, easily destroyed argument.
Let's see if you can be honest enough to address it this time.
More insults without any factual backing. Surprise surprise.What is typical is that you don't know what classical liberalism is, ignorance is a requirement for your stance so I'm hardly surprised.
WRONG. You cannot prove that. If a child can drive a car , pay taxes on a job, express their love or hate from their parents, who are you to make the judgment that there is no way they can conscent to a relationship? This is the lazy general argument of yours explored fully. You just inserted your own morality into the mix just as you attack those who have a moral argument against gay marriage.Of course you can, incest and pedophilia for instance both have a negative impact on the participants
Welcome back to hypocrisy.
Because you run away every time from addressing the fact that consent is simply a law just like the laws against gay marriage you want to tear down. Once you claim its about treating people equality as you have claimed you cannot limit that equality based on age any more than you could limit it to heterosexual couples.and AGAIN you want to illustrate that the concept of consent is completely foreign to you. It's really convenient for me that you keep wanting to advertise this fact.
But since you've run away every time I've nailed you on it I wont be surprised when you run away again.
No you just needed the help.Oh goodie! Caps lock and bold print, things must be getting serious.
LOL!!! The hypocrisy just knows no boundaries does it? In one breath you claim people should have the RIGHT (your words so don't lie about it again) to pursue happiness at the same time you want to limit that new "right" to ONLY 2 person adult couples. If you just stopped and thought about what you just said it would be such a blessing.No, it makes a direct reference to the DoI and the unalienable right to pursue happiness, but you won't stand for that, it's your position to obstruct those who seek to fulfill that promise. How very anti-American of you, but your not a lover of freedom so I doubt you care much for this country anyway.
I understand it perfectly. I'm just not allowing you to hide behind some laws that ban some sexual practices you don't like but want to tear down laws that ban sexual practices you do like and still claim you want people to have "unalienable right to pursue happiness"We'll end here, where you neatly advertise yet again that you don't understand consent.Ignorance is simply not knowing what something is, stupid is continuing to make the same mistake, we're all curious to see the path you choose.
Its a joke position because its a lie. You do want to limit people's "unalienable right to pursue happiness" by hiding behind consent laws.
But go ahead and run away again on that point. Its sad but amusing.