Another State Legalizes gay Marriage

[Koga No Goshi]

"Animals can't give consent". What is consent?

Consent; to give assent or approval.

You can say that animals can't do certain things, but give consent? They can't tell you whether they want something or not - whether they approve or not? Do you own pets, have you ever interacted with an animal? They most assuredly have personalities, likes and dislikes.

Can my dog tell my doctor what my medical directives are?

[ICantSpellDawg]

Can my dog tell my doctor what my medical directives are?

That depends on what your medical directives are. I know some people who couldn't relay medical directives.

[Koga No Goshi]

That depends on what your medical directives are. I know some people who couldn't relay medical directives.

Tuff even going back to the beginning of literacy, consent has been either oral or by making one's mark. Animals can't even do that unless trained to do so and even then are merely repeating a trained action and have no idea what it is they are "signing."

You are too smart to believe this ridiculous argument you are making. Try another tack.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Tuff even going back to the beginning of literacy, consent has been either oral or by making one's mark. Animals can't even do that unless trained to do so and even then are merely repeating a trained action and have no idea what it is they are "signing."

You are too smart to believe this ridiculous argument you are making. Try another tack.

If people are born being attracted to animals and it hurts nobody, why is it wrong?

Aside:
Just curious, but where is there a federal prohibition against discrimination against personal practices or lifestyle choices in Federal law?

I can see how such laws in Connecticut have led to their recent ruling - Thank goodness our Federal law hasn't passed yet.

[KarlXII]

If people are born being attracted to animals and it hurts nobody, why is it wrong?

And what of the animal?

[ICantSpellDawg]

And what of the animal?

What of the animal? Do you know a dog on earth who wouldn't appreciate more one on one time with their owner? Couldn't they say that a dog humping your leg was consent?

[KarlXII]

What of the animal? Do you know a dog on earth who wouldn't appreciate more one on one time with their owner?

You say a man and his dog should be able to marry due to sexual attraction. It's already well known that animals are animals and have sex for the purpose of breeding, and they often do. However, a dog cannot give consent to marry, cannot say "I do" and cannot make decisions in the event of your incapacitation. Therefore- they cannot marry. Have all the wild sex you want, but unless you get the dog to say "I do" and sign a legal document that it knows what it states, your argument is silly. We're talking about two consenting adults, not a man and his fetis for his dog.

[Productivity]

What of the animal? Do you know a dog on earth who wouldn't appreciate more one on one time with their owner? Couldn't they say that a dog humping your leg was consent?

Consent implies understanding what is being agreed to and unreservedly agreeing to that. While I think my dog is very smart and has quite a strong problem solving ability, I don't think there is anyway I can convey to him the entire concept of marriage and what it would entail and then proceed to ask him to consent to that. Until animals have clearly demonstrated the higher order functions needed to understand the concept of marriage and the concept of giving consent, then marriage between a human and an animal cannot happen as marriage requires consent from both parties.

You're running on a completely ridiculous slippery slope here as far as I can tell, do you actually intend to go anywhere with the whole marrying a goat argument or are you just being argumentative for the sake of it?

[Koga No Goshi]

If people are born being attracted to animals and it hurts nobody, why is it wrong?

Aside:
Just curious, but where is there a federal prohibition against discrimination against personal practices or lifestyle choices in Federal law?

I can see how such laws in Connecticut have led to their recent ruling - Thank goodness our Federal law hasn't passed yet.

Maybe because picking and choosing who to allow access to equal rights based upon whether you like their religious views or political views or what type or race of woman they marry or what kind of sex they like isn't a good thing? :)

[ICantSpellDawg]

Maybe because picking and choosing who to allow access to equal rights based upon whether you like their religious views or political views or what type or race of woman they marry or what kind of sex they like isn't a good thing? :)

C'mon - that wasn't an answer.

My point is that the legislation against discrimination in the workplace based on sexual identity should fail at the Federal level in order to avoid this exact type of situation. The Federal protection doesn't currently exist for made up sexual identity - but it might soon. Then the Supreme court may use the same excuse to find the current marriage laws unconstitutional. People should know what they support.

[m52nickerson]

C'mon - that wasn't an answer.

My point is that the legislation against discrimination in the workplace based on sexual identity should fail at the Federal level in order to avoid this exact type of situation. The Federal protection doesn't currently exist for made up sexual identity - but it might soon. Then the Supreme court may use the same excuse to find the current marriage laws unconstitutional. People should know what they support.

You do realize there is federal regulation against discrimination based on sex. It protects federal workers from being discriminated in the workplace.

[Koga No Goshi]

C'mon - that wasn't an answer.

My point is that the legislation against discrimination in the workplace based on sexual identity should fail at the Federal level in order to avoid this exact type of situation. The Federal protection doesn't currently exist for made up sexual identity - but it might soon. Then the Supreme court may use the same excuse to find the current marriage laws unconstitutional. People should know what they support.

You keep saying this over and over, Tuff. You saying homosexuality is "made up" doesn't make it so. What exactly makes you think your personal rationalization for the right to discriminate against gay people (because they're "choosing" something undesirable, not born that way) should have more weight than what millions of gay people say?

[Rhyfelwyr]

Well TSM you want 'freedom' this is what happens.

EDIT: Meant TSM not TSF.