Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#6881
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> The issue I was discussing was the changing of the definiton of marriage
> to satisfy everyone's desires
Slippery-slope arguments have never held much persuasive or logical
weight.
> You claim discrimination by excluding gays. I claim that others could
> claim that you would want to discriminate against them because you would
> exlude non-adults, non-humans, or even non-living things for those
> humans that wanted to marry, say, their dog, tree, torque wrench, etc.
And this is a slippery-slope argument totally divorced, as it were, from
any reality.
DS
> The issue I was discussing was the changing of the definiton of marriage
> to satisfy everyone's desires
Slippery-slope arguments have never held much persuasive or logical
weight.
> You claim discrimination by excluding gays. I claim that others could
> claim that you would want to discriminate against them because you would
> exlude non-adults, non-humans, or even non-living things for those
> humans that wanted to marry, say, their dog, tree, torque wrench, etc.
And this is a slippery-slope argument totally divorced, as it were, from
any reality.
DS
#6882
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> The issue I was discussing was the changing of the definiton of marriage
> to satisfy everyone's desires
Slippery-slope arguments have never held much persuasive or logical
weight.
> You claim discrimination by excluding gays. I claim that others could
> claim that you would want to discriminate against them because you would
> exlude non-adults, non-humans, or even non-living things for those
> humans that wanted to marry, say, their dog, tree, torque wrench, etc.
And this is a slippery-slope argument totally divorced, as it were, from
any reality.
DS
> The issue I was discussing was the changing of the definiton of marriage
> to satisfy everyone's desires
Slippery-slope arguments have never held much persuasive or logical
weight.
> You claim discrimination by excluding gays. I claim that others could
> claim that you would want to discriminate against them because you would
> exlude non-adults, non-humans, or even non-living things for those
> humans that wanted to marry, say, their dog, tree, torque wrench, etc.
And this is a slippery-slope argument totally divorced, as it were, from
any reality.
DS
#6883
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbemisinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
> The issue I was discussing was the changing of the definiton of marriage
> to satisfy everyone's desires
Slippery-slope arguments have never held much persuasive or logical
weight.
> You claim discrimination by excluding gays. I claim that others could
> claim that you would want to discriminate against them because you would
> exlude non-adults, non-humans, or even non-living things for those
> humans that wanted to marry, say, their dog, tree, torque wrench, etc.
And this is a slippery-slope argument totally divorced, as it were, from
any reality.
DS
> The issue I was discussing was the changing of the definiton of marriage
> to satisfy everyone's desires
Slippery-slope arguments have never held much persuasive or logical
weight.
> You claim discrimination by excluding gays. I claim that others could
> claim that you would want to discriminate against them because you would
> exlude non-adults, non-humans, or even non-living things for those
> humans that wanted to marry, say, their dog, tree, torque wrench, etc.
And this is a slippery-slope argument totally divorced, as it were, from
any reality.
DS
#6884
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Greg wrote:
> The difference between a heterosexual or a homosexual individual is
> defined by the activities the individual engages in.
By you, perhaps. Not by them, nor by most folks with credentials in
psychology, physiology, behavioural science and other related fields.
DS
> The difference between a heterosexual or a homosexual individual is
> defined by the activities the individual engages in.
By you, perhaps. Not by them, nor by most folks with credentials in
psychology, physiology, behavioural science and other related fields.
DS
#6885
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Greg wrote:
> The difference between a heterosexual or a homosexual individual is
> defined by the activities the individual engages in.
By you, perhaps. Not by them, nor by most folks with credentials in
psychology, physiology, behavioural science and other related fields.
DS
> The difference between a heterosexual or a homosexual individual is
> defined by the activities the individual engages in.
By you, perhaps. Not by them, nor by most folks with credentials in
psychology, physiology, behavioural science and other related fields.
DS
#6886
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Greg wrote:
> The difference between a heterosexual or a homosexual individual is
> defined by the activities the individual engages in.
By you, perhaps. Not by them, nor by most folks with credentials in
psychology, physiology, behavioural science and other related fields.
DS
> The difference between a heterosexual or a homosexual individual is
> defined by the activities the individual engages in.
By you, perhaps. Not by them, nor by most folks with credentials in
psychology, physiology, behavioural science and other related fields.
DS
#6887
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Larry St. Regis" wrote:
>
> Out here in Ahnold's Kalifonia, we have a "domestic partners" registry that
> allows partners OF THE SAME --- to register their relationship. In most
> "progressive" companies, mine included, registered domestic partners are
> eligible for the same benefits that married couples enjoy.
>
> The problem I have with the situation is that OPPOSITE --- partners do not
> get the same consideration! My wife and I lived together for five years
> before getting married. We were denied the ability to register as domestic
> partners, with the cited reason being "you are eligible to be legally
> married". Hmmph.
So much for equal treatment!
#6888
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Larry St. Regis" wrote:
>
> Out here in Ahnold's Kalifonia, we have a "domestic partners" registry that
> allows partners OF THE SAME --- to register their relationship. In most
> "progressive" companies, mine included, registered domestic partners are
> eligible for the same benefits that married couples enjoy.
>
> The problem I have with the situation is that OPPOSITE --- partners do not
> get the same consideration! My wife and I lived together for five years
> before getting married. We were denied the ability to register as domestic
> partners, with the cited reason being "you are eligible to be legally
> married". Hmmph.
So much for equal treatment!
#6889
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study about safetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Larry St. Regis" wrote:
>
> Out here in Ahnold's Kalifonia, we have a "domestic partners" registry that
> allows partners OF THE SAME --- to register their relationship. In most
> "progressive" companies, mine included, registered domestic partners are
> eligible for the same benefits that married couples enjoy.
>
> The problem I have with the situation is that OPPOSITE --- partners do not
> get the same consideration! My wife and I lived together for five years
> before getting married. We were denied the ability to register as domestic
> partners, with the cited reason being "you are eligible to be legally
> married". Hmmph.
So much for equal treatment!
#6890
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - a Liberal Scam?, (was Huge study aboutsafetycanbe misinterpreted by SUV drivers)
"Daniel J. Stern" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Bill Putney wrote:
>
> > neither do I accept that homosexuality is more than a choice.
>
> Oh, indubitably. For all recorded history, some people have been
> *choosing* to get ostracized (at best) and violently killed (at worst) by
> their families and society at large. Fer sher, fer sher.
>
> > I just believe that there is a "natural" order to things.
>
> ...which, apparently, includes only those things you deem "natural".
Well, yeah! Based on a higher authority that I know you have a problem
with.
Look - obviously we'll never agree. We both choose what we want to
believe, and we live with the consequences of our choices. When it
comes down to it, you'll vote for and support people and causes that you
believe in, same for me, and on each one, one of us will probably not be
very happy with the outcome and claim that the other's beliefs and
actions are adversely affecting the other's life, nation, rights,
children, grandchildren, etc. In the whole scheme of things, this is
all very temporary. I believe in long term. Again: choices and
consequences. Let's talk again in a few thousand years.
Bill Putney
(to reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with "x")
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----