LogFAQs > #910898451

UnfairRepresent posted...

prettyprincess posted...

one granted a right not previously available to a group people and the other would be overturning (in a shorter amount of time) a right recently granted so, yes, you can answer those differently in terms of decision timing, which doesnt even factor in the importance of granting vs restricting an individuals rights into the argument

That's utter bullshit and you know it. It would be quick if the Supreme Court made dramatic federal rulings on contenious state issues regardless of what semantics to use to describe the "groups"

This is what I mean, you're just too cowardly and dishonest to answer truthfully because you know the truth concede's Boogie Stance isn't as black and white as you imply it to be.

"It would be less violent if States legalized gay marriage one by one and not federally quickly at once." is not the unreasonable stance you pretend it to be.

It's completely unreasonable because you are still in favor of treating people like subhuman degenerates not deserving the same rights as other human beings because some assholes might get violent over it. You should be attacking the violence rather than denying the rights of other human beings.
---

"If you wish to converse with me define your terms"
Voltaire