[Platt] With regard to interracial marriage, the Court said it is not up to the voters to decide whether or not a black and white can marry.
[Arlo] What's your point? [Arlo] That there are some liberties that rise above the voting desires of the population. You can't "vote away" interracial marriage, and you should not be able to "vote away" gay marriage. [Platt] So I gather you think the states shouldn't interfere with polygamy. [Arlo] Did I stutter? [Platt] I take it -- ignoring the familiar smokescreen -- that polygamy is OK with you. How about consensual sex between a father and adult daughter? [Arlo] Yes. And much as you think the "slippery slope" is grand logic, I find it a laughable refuge of those schooled only in talk-radio blather. I could point to countless research studies demonstrating the birth defects and high cost to society of incestual relationships. So I think society is right to not promote that possibility. But what about third cousins, fifith cousins, etc? What about those related by marriage only? In any case, the only time society is right to step in is when a demonstrable burden is placed on society. You can't just say "not sure, maybe" and expect that to pass as a reason society should forbid a behavior. The burden of proof is on you, as Keith keeps asking (much nicer than I would, but then he's likely a gentleman and I'm worn out from dealing with your distortive, hypocritic nonsense.) [Platt] Yeah, distortions like 100 million lives snuffed out under communism. [Arlo] No. Distortion like it had nothing to do with the belief that, like the neocons, people need a strong state nationalist myth to subjugate them, and that similarly a "holy war mentality" of propaganda and the demand for blind, unyielding patriotism was the cause of the dictatorships. [Platt] Marx himself proposed a dictatorship. You can run, but you can't hide from the record. [Arlo] I answered this distortion already. Anyone interested can check the archives. [Platt] I've seen a lot a specious arguments from you in the past, but this takes the cake. [Arlo] You should. You write them. The reason for the "comparison" here is that in an argument about "gay marriage" you resorted, once again, to the "Arlo is a commie" line. So, since you took it upon yourself to compare me to a communist dictator in your argument on gay marriage, it makes sense for me to point out that those same said dictators sided with you on the very issue we are discussing, the very issue you evoked their names as a way to distract and distort away from the issue at hand (gay marriage). Sorry if that point escaped you. Speaking of which, I noticed a nice, clear rhetorical slide away from interracial marriage. You have been vocal claiming that "gay marriage" would lead to a degeneration of society. You have implied that "interracial marriage" may have also contributed to the degeneration of society. You are using the same ridiculous slippery slope argument that was used when interracial marriage was ruled on by the Court (ie, a right that can't be voted away). Answer me this. Do you find "gay marriage" to be immoral? Do you find "interracial marriage" to be immoral? Do you find homosexuality itself to be "immoral"? And if so, kindly point out the source of your morality. (Remember, you lambasted me for including anyone but Pirsig, when I had cited Marx, Jesus and Buddha and some of the sources for my morality. So I assume you wont make an empty plea to Christianity.) moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
