ACT introduces Marriage Equality Bill

[Chard]

Keep fiddling with semantics, chard. It's a good distraction from your lack of logic as to the real argument.

No semantics involved. This is simple mathematics, less than and not equal to are both completely different concepts than equal to. Surely even a poorly educated plebe like you knows these simple mathematical truths?

[Super Nova]

Keep fiddling with semantics, chard. It's a good distraction from your lack of logic as to the real argument.

No semantics involved. This is simple mathematics, less than and not equal to are both completely different concepts than equal to. Surely even a poorly educated plebe like you knows these simple mathematical truths?

Maybe they are using differential calculus where they are tending towards equal but never quite make it and have not done the proof that they are equal and the same using this method.

[Chard]

Keep fiddling with semantics, chard. It's a good distraction from your lack of logic as to the real argument.

No semantics involved. This is simple mathematics, less than and not equal to are both completely different concepts than equal to. Surely even a poorly educated plebe like you knows these simple mathematical truths?

Maybe they are using differential calculus where they are tending towards equal but never quite make it and have not done the proof that they are equal and the same using this method.

SN, that would assume they know nothing of even basic additive and subtractive math. I'm attempting to at least grant IQS the benifit of the dout here. Rest of these martians I'm not so sure about.

[Chard]

blah blah blah I'm an idiot completely ignorant of logic, the mechanics of the English language, and basic math blah blah blah

Listen, you fucking jackass, I am goddamn tired of dealing with your ignorant ass so I'll just lay it down Barny style for you as if I was addressing a particularly stupid child.

1. Statements of difference, like "apples vs oranges", only work if it's a direct comparison. I.e. directly comparing an apple to an orange, no value judgements, just an acknowledgement that the two are not alike. By making the value judgement that "apples cannot be equal to oranges" you are saying there is something inherently better about oranges.

In context of this thread, saying "apples cannot be equal to oranges" is the exact same thing as saying "gays cannot be equal to straights", you fucking moron. Had you left it at "gays and straights are different" then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

2. Less than (<), not equal (≠), and equal (=) are three entirely different mathematical concepts. By saying something is not equal to another thing you are making a direct statement that one thing is less than another thing. By saying "apples cannot be equal to oranges" you are saying that Apple ≠ Orange, i.e. Apples < Oranges. In context of this thread by saying "Gays cannot be equal to straights" you are saying that Gays ≠ Straights and therefore Gays < Straights.

Now get the fuck out of the thread until you can either admit you were wring or you can admit that you made a hugely poor choice of words.

[Rorschach]

blah blah blah I'm an idiot completely ignorant of logic, the mechanics of the English language, and basic math blah blah blah

Listen, you fucking jackass, I am goddamn tired of dealing with your ignorant ass so I'll just lay it down Barny style for you as if I was addressing a particularly stupid child.

1. Statements of difference, like "apples vs oranges", only work if it's a direct comparison. I.e. directly comparing an apple to an orange, no value judgements, just an acknowledgement that the two are not alike. By making the value judgement that "apples cannot be equal to oranges" you are saying there is something inherently better about oranges. I made no value judgement... YOU did... .

In context of this thread, saying "apples cannot be equal to oranges" is the exact same thing as saying "gays cannot be equal to straights", you fucking moron. Had you left it at "gays and straights are different" then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

nope... that's all you yet again and people have been telling you you got it wrong.. but....

2. Less than (<), not equal (≠), and equal (=) are three entirely different mathematical concepts. By saying something is not equal to another thing you are making a direct statement that one thing is less than another thing. By saying "apples cannot be equal to oranges" you are saying that Apple ≠ Orange, i.e. Apples < Oranges. In context of this thread by saying "Gays cannot be equal to straights" you are saying that Gays ≠ Straights and therefore Gays < Straights.

Nope... that is your interpretation... always has been. Not mine at all. Need I remind you I only used the word equal because you decided to bring in the EQUALITY argument which I said is not the issue. I never said gays cannot be equal to straights... you say it. In my context everyone but YOU got it. You still apparently DON'T GET IT. I didn't use the less than term... YOU did.

Now get the fuck out of the thread until you can either admit you were wring or you can admit that you made a hugely poor choice of words.

Like I said the problem isn't mine... you are the one in denial.

Perhaps you'd like to show in what ways Apples are equal to Oranges? BO already said they are both fruits. And indeed explained it all to you in regards to the analogy. I was comparing unions...

YOU however are the one with the comprehension problem... still not sure whether it's cultural or individual in your case though.

[Chard]

I made no value judgement... YOU did... .

Bullshit, you fucking lair. I've quoted you several times now doing exactly that.

Nope... that is your interpretation... always has been.

Yes, it's also the interpretation of anyone whose education extends beyond the third grade, you illiterate and mathematically challenged buffoon.

I never said gays cannot be equal to straights... you say it.

Liar, you said and I've directly quoted you saying it several times now.

Perhaps you'd like to show in what ways Apples are equal to Oranges? BO already said they are both fruits. And indeed explained it all to you in regards to the analogy. I was comparing unions...

I don't have to. I'm not the one claiming that one is inherently better than the other. Also, thanks for confirming that you really were talking about gays vs straights. "I was comparing unions" just changes the math to "gay marriage != straight marriage" which is effectively the same as saying "gays != straights", you fucking moron.

[IQS.RLOW]

Chin up Chard.
One day you won't have to go on living on the "down low"

[Chard]

Chin up Chard.
One day you won't have to go on living on the "down low"

IQS, seriously? The best you can do is a closeted gay joke? Bro... I'm disappointed.

[IQS.RLOW]

Frankly, I couldn't give a shit.

As far as I'm concerned, marriage is between a man and a woman and the slippery slope applies. I've never seen anyone argue a decent case for allowing for all forms of marriage. They all want discrimination based purely on what their little perversion isn't.

So fuck em all. Stick to your closets, your free love compounds, your swingers clubs- you can't have marriage.

[Rorschach]

He's not taking his misinterpretation, due to his lack of comprehension skills well, is he...?