Openly gay New York Democrats oppose plan to open Chick-fil-A restaurants along I-90

If it has nothing to do with marriage, then remove it from marriage law.
Until then, sorry, the couples are not equal, so gay rights are the special rights.
There is no way around it.
Either treat couples exactly the same or don't pretend that gay marriage is not a special right for homosexuals only.

 

That is a fallacy, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking
All heterosexual couples regardless of their fertility are regulated exactly same way that is fundamentally different from homosexual couples.

 

Nonsense. I was responding to your risible claim that, “Right, and that statement is exactly contradict to leftists delirious idea that marriage is not relevant to procreation.” It was YOU who referred to the “leftists delirious idea that marriage is not relevant to procreation.” I pointed out that marriage is not relevant to procreation in marriages where procreation will simply not happen. That’s the truth, not a fallacy.

 

It would have to be in marriage law for it to be removed. It isn’t.

You regurgitating “special right” when same sex couples are similarly situated just shows how much you choose to ignore facts.

 

My ex wife took birth control for 5 years, only to find out in her 2nd marriage that she never had the ability to procreate. And still, birth control pills are prescribed because of the potential of procreation.
Government wasnt concerned with married couples not procreating and was instead only concerned with unmarried couples doing so.

 

Heterosexual couples are responsible for the perpetuation of the human species. Same sex couples are not.

 

They are not similarly situated. Your statement is based on cherry-picking fallacy.

 

We do not know whether procreation will happen or not. That is why I have pointed out to the article about logical fallacy.

 

Actually, in many cases, we do indeed know. Post menopausal women and women who have had hysterectomies are not going to “procreate.”

 

you do not know exact date when infertility is going to occur
Special rights cannot be based on cherry picking logical fallacy.
heterosexual couples are fundamentally different from homosexual couples and cannot be regulated with the same set of laws.

 

I would say that as a woman who underwent menopause over 20 years ago, that a snowball would stand a better chance in Hell than I would today of contributing to the human gene pool. And a woman who has a hysterectomy experiences instant infertility.

But what does all this have to do with the thread topic, which is about gay Democrats opposing the opening of a CFA?

speaking of logical fallacies, your posts are riddled with them.

 

Or, at a minimum marriage should be extended to any two consenting adults desiring a marriage. EQUAL treatment under the law.

 

Indeed. What gays are demanding is EQUAL rights under the law, not special rights. The “special rights” argument is absurd.

 

It has everything to do with the topic, because any disagreement with the concept of special rights for gays is considered anti gay and so called "discrimination".
In fact I am ok with homosexuality but totally against special rights for homosexual couples.

If the law treats different couples differently then rights are not equal, it is special rights granted to homosexuals only.

 

What are you babbling about? What “special rights” do gays get that the rest of us don’t?k

 

Gay marriage is a special right for gays, in case you did not know and did not read previous messages.

 

Correction, fertile heterosexual couples who decide to reproduce… Which has nothing to do with a civil contract.

Try again

 

How is a bisexual same sex couple different than an infertile or elderly heterosexual couple?

 

What do you mean infertile? No one knows which couple is infertile, so the marriage is granted to every potentially fertile couple.
Older couples were fertile at some point and they were treated and regulated as such.
That is their fundamental difference from homosexual couples.
Again your are trying to build your "justifications" on logical fallacies.

 

RU serious? How is marriage for gay couples a “special” right, when straight couples take it for granted? Good grief.

 

Yours is the logical fallacy. if my 100 yo mother decided to get married, she’s not going to be granted a marriage license based on the fact that she raised a bunch of kids eons ago.

 

Marriage is a special right for heterosexual couples, because they need to be regulated by the government, in many different ways
Homosexual couples do not need to be regulated so gay marriage is a just a gift to homosexuals, i.e. special right.

 

That makes no sense. Under the law, gay marriages and straight marriages are governed by the same laws.

 

Infertile means unable to reproduce.

Individuals are only “regulated” if they have a child — this is true of heterosexuals, bisexuals and homosexuals. Elderly and infertile couples have never been regulated and if you believe they have then bisexuals or anyone that has ever had intercourse with a member of the opposite sex would have also been “regulated”.

Why can a bisexual same sex couple not wed under your desperate and nonsensical scenario? I love that you continue to scream logical fallacy while your entire premise is a giant one.

 

Why does an elderly or infertile heterosexual need to be regulated? In what way are they regulated? Can you post the law…