![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia established the freedom to get marriage as a constitutionally protected.
Pedophilia doesn't affect me directly either, as I'm not a child so I can't be victimized. And protecting marriage as a constitutional right would have no bearing on gays whatsoever, unless you redefine marriage to no longer mean the union of a man and woman to "a man or woman or a man and a man or a woman and a woman that like each other", and while you're at it the polygamists can chime in that it should be redefined as "a man or men and woman or women that like each other". Oh wait, I forgot, one is unquestionably morally sound and the other is not, because militant left wingers say so.
Either that, or McCarthyism is alive and well. People learn to keep their mouths shut and their opinions to themselves, because it simply isn't worth the risk.
Consensual gay marriage is victim-less. You are trying to limit the freedom of people, when it doesn't affect you, and has no victims.
Um no, did you even read the case that I linked? Marriage *was* defined in those states as being between two people of the same race. The supreme court ruled that marriage was a protected right under the 14th amendment and therefore could not defined as such. Constitutional rights override legislated law.
Just so I can understand your position correctly, do you object to gay marriage because you think it is immoral?
LOL, how about homophone?
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/58236366-90/says-english-homophones-language.html.csp
Publicly traded companies generally don't tolerate CEOs who donate to discriminatory causes.
I just championed the idea that everyone is entitled to their opinion, and the opinions are valid based on people's different beliefs and moral compass. Having an opinion and trying to destroy someone's livelihood or business because their opinion differs from yours are two different things.
He didn't say "homosexuality is gross". He donated to a group campaigning against gay marriage. That makes him an active participant in the discrimination.
You don't know what freedom of speech is. He still has the legal right to communicate his opinion.believe in freedom of speech, unless it offends them!
I just championed the idea that everyone is entitled to their opinion, and the opinions are valid based on people's different beliefs and moral compass. Having an opinion and trying to destroy someone's livelihood or business because their opinion differs from yours are two different things.
Its the difference between saying "I think homosexuality is gross" and firing someone that works at your office because they were in a pride parade. One is an opinion, the other is just mean and vindictive douchebaggery, the current tool of the militant left-winger evangelists.
Remember, liberals believe in freedom of speech, unless it offends them!
So, you're are pointing out that progressives are hypocrites? Well, no shit
Like I said earlier, I wasn't being sarcastic.
So, you're are pointing out that progressives are hypocrites? Well, no shit
OK, that was a bit sarcastic.
Great. I wanted to clear that up.
It matters more than ever then. That's the whole point of freedom of speech: no matter how critically society is judging you, you still enjoy the full protections of the law.
I've never heard of conservatives organizing boycotts of popular retail stores en masse or trying to get CEOs fired because of their liberal beliefs or have a celebrity forced to lose his career or grovel in front of the public apologizing for some left-winger silly comment (hell Rosie O'Donnel and most of that cast .
You are trying very hard to reduce this to a result of *any* disagreement. You are also suggesting that this person ['s life] was "destroyed". Neither of these are true.