Back to the vanishing versus.
Homosexuality could disappear tomorrow and it would be an odd perplexing story.
Heterosexuality?
Heterosexual marriages have a strong case for incentives.
And weāre back to space sharks. Pce
Heterosexuality on its own crucial and inherent merits. Homosexuality because the heterosexuals get to do it. Thatās pretty much the argument.
We are talking space sharks by default when we even act like the two circumstance remotely merit incentivization to the same degree. If one even merits incentives at all. We jumped the space shark with that. No crap weāve started to even hear about female penises. The inability to say no. The inabilty to discern even differences that practically scream out for attention.
No we arenāt. Space sharks is a direct reference to the mouth breathingly stupid concept of heterosexuality going away as an argument point.
Nobody is suggesting the same degree of public recognition/incentivization. People like you obviously continue to exist despite the SCOTUS opinion.
Like when interracial marriage was legalized. My great grandparents on momās side weāre first in line to make sure nobody ever felt it was equal.
Letās not pretend there is a logical and reasoned argument as to why I should feel obligated to support state recognized gay marriage. Can we dispense with that yet? And just move on to emotional appeals?
Happy to. Can we also agree there is no logical and reasoned argument as to why you should support reverting gay marriage being legal?
Of course there is. It has no society wide inherent value of critical importance. Unlike heterosexuality. We all agree that is true. And have since the moment people conceded the hypothetical vanishing point.
It shouldnāt be elevated beyond, say, another personās friendship.
This perfectly well explains why you would not support making it legal. It doesnāt make it logical to revert that status when it costs you (and society) nothing.
Of course it does. So as to correct a lie we just told ourselves and codified in law.
And, I appreciate that
I have neither logical or moral obligations to support it.
Congratulations. Youve only said this 20 times now.
You also have no logical or sound reason to support itās repeal
Of course I do. There was no logic to its adoption. A correction.
Sure there was. You just donāt agree with the logic.
A correction that both isnāt coming, and does nothing (logically) to further your cause of incentivization of heteros
Oh, it will come. We arenāt the end of history.
1 Like
LOL. Best of luck pal
Ironically, my momās grandparents genuinely believed that one day society would wisen up and stop allowing interracial marriage.
No luck necessary. Thank you though!
As an aside why does racism always come up?
Two scenarios.
Would you (nobody specific) feel disappointed in your son if he announced he would not, ever, date black women? āI didnāt raise you to be close-minded!ā
Would you be equally disappointed if he announced he would never, ever, date a male? āI didnāt raise you to be close-minded!ā
I think very very few people actually feel like the two are analogous, whe push comes to shove. Methinks this is obsufcation.
You really gotta be one of those āweāre raising our kids without a/without seeing genderā types to use the race/interacial analogies and seem genuine.
Because this is the United States: the one territory on Earth in which racism has ever existed.
2 Likes