Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MinnesotaLibertarian
We were talking about marriage, not sex.

Well then, how dare you presume to tell somebody who they can love? As Helen Hunt sais in the first episode of "Mad About You," "Can you imagine being told that who you love is wrong?"

We don't currently recognize any legal rights for animals, so what's to stop this from happening right now? Furthermore, how is this at all related to the California Supreme Court decision?

Sometimes I wonder if Libertarians have all guided their political opinions by a history book called "The Founding Fathers, Prohibition and the Last Couple of Years," because if you and I were having this coversation in 1971 it would go something like this:

You: It's none of the state's business if these homosexuals are consenting adults, so we should repeal laws outlawing homosexuality and stop treating it as a mental disorder.

Me: Aw jeez, next thing you know, you'll be pushing for them to get married, and they'll be pushing this stuff in the schools as a healthy option!

You: Oh, that's just hyperbole, and besides, since there's no legal rights to marriage for homosexuals, there's nothing preventing it right now. Who cares?

Yep, you guys never seem to fgure out that "live and let live" only works with people who respect your life in return. In other words, people who care nothing about your freedom are swinging away at the foundations of society with a wrecking ball while you worry about whether the super of the building is a prude or not.

154 posted on 05/15/2008 1:29:23 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (It's not conservative to accept an inept Commander-in-Chief in a time of war. Back Mac.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies ]


To: Mr. Silverback
Yep, you guys never seem to fgure out that "live and let live" only works with people who respect your life in return.

No, you guys (social conservatives) never seem to figure out that once you give government the authority to enforce morality, they can cram pretty much whatever they want down your throat, even if you find it objectionable.

In other words, people who care nothing about your freedom are swinging away at the foundations of society with a wrecking ball while you worry about whether the super of the building is a prude or not.

I'm afraid this analogy is not clear. Who do you mean by "people"? Homosexuals? The Supreme Court?
160 posted on 05/15/2008 1:36:51 PM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Silverback

I believe this is the second time you recieve my nomination for a post of the week, sir. That was brilliant.


394 posted on 05/15/2008 8:34:01 PM PDT by The Ghost of Rudy McRomney (Using Hillary to nip Obama's heels is like beating a dead horse with an armed nuclear bomb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Silverback

Well done!


398 posted on 05/15/2008 8:48:38 PM PDT by wardaddy (Obama is for the Deliverance Was A Documentary crowd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

To: Mr. Silverback

It’s absolutely amazing that there are still people who think sanctioning same-sex “marriage” is a reduction in the size and scope of government. They’ll still be saying that even after the first Christian restaurant owner gets fined $15,000 for not providing same-sex “couples” with discounts on Valentine’s Day, or when the state orders private dating services to provide same-sex match-ups or be closed down.


401 posted on 05/15/2008 9:04:51 PM PDT by puroresu (Enjoy ASIAN CINEMA? See my Freeper page for recommendations (updated!).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson