McCain gets slammed!!!

[LimeTwister]

I'm confused...your whole argument is that straight people should get the title marriage because they can reproduce?

Then, should polygamy be legal?  Should a woman be allowed to marry someone if she continuously has abortions?  Should married people be allowed to use contraception?  Should Britney Spears still be with Kevin? Do you want to give her more?  Do all cows have spots?  Do cats bark?

[Grakthis]

I'm not incapable obviously. I can imagine it, but I think before I can make a decision on whether or not they should be allowed to marry, I'd need to know more about the differences that evolved, how the world functions at that point, etc. I'm not going to just say for sure one way or another whether or not these people should be allowed to marry- I think it's premature.

You said, and I QUOTE:

"It's childish, imo, to bring up a hypothetical situation that is so far beyond our comprehension of what the world would look like for that to happen"

There is absolutly no reason to assume in my descrption that this new species of human is different from us in any relevant way.  If they were, i'd have stipulated that.

They are HUMAN.  Maybe they are taller, or shorter, or have darker skin or lighter skin, or purple hair and blue feet, it doesn't matter.

They are humans who are a different species and we cannot breed with them as a result.

But that is beyond your comprehension, right?

[NoelleNC]

Unlike you, I don't posit that I can make such a legal decision based on my own meandering imagination.

Evolution takes a long time in most cases and as far as I know it'd take a lot of time for this new "species" to come into being without our own manipulation. I'm just saying that we don't know what the state of the world will be at that point in time to make a decision about the laws that should be in place.

[Logikal X]

I'm confused...your whole argument is that straight people should get the title marriage because they can reproduce?

Then, should polygamy be legal?  Should a woman be allowed to marry someone if she continuously has abortions?  Should married people be allowed to use contraception?  Should Britney Spears still be with Kevin? Do you want to give her more?  Do all cows have spots?  Do cats bark?

You apparently didnt read WHY thats her argument, or if you did you didnt understand it.    So yes, you are definitely confused.

[NoelleNC]

I have no problem with polygamy as long as all parties are consenting and of age. I don't think of it as an ideal relationship, I'd never want that for myself, but I don't personally care. Also, serial abortionists can marry under my premise. They're probably not the type of person I'd want to get to know and I wouldn't condone their behavior, but they can reproduce, no? Mmmm... everything else you said I also agree with... and Idc if Britney is with Kevin. They are both cuhrazee.

[Grakthis]

Unlike you, I don't posit that I can make such a legal decision based on my own meandering imagination.

So you're not smart enough.  It's ok.  Just go ahead and say it.

You should already read up on advanced physics before you make fun of people who discuss, debate and even prove theories based on things we cannot actually do or do not actually exist.

Evolution takes a long time in most cases and as far as I know it'd take a lot of time for this new "species" to come into being without our own manipulation. I'm just saying that we don't know what the state of the world will be at that point in time to make a decision about the laws that should be in place.

I didn't ask about a hypothetical distant future where everything is different.  Imagine they existed right now.  Imagine a spaceship landed right now with people on it who were from a distant world but genetically they were human only a different species of human.  The spaceship represents the last of their people because their planet was destroyed and they made an arc ship to escape.  There are thousands of them.

Would you let one of these space-men marry a human in your legal vision?

[NoelleNC]

If they can reproduce, probably. If not, no. If for some reason they bring down a plague upon our race and everyone starts dying, or all their children are born deformed and screwy, then even if they can reproduce I don't think it would be logical to allow the law to marry them. And if their presence causes a plague upon us, I don't think it'd be logical to allow them near us. Yay for bringing science fiction into reality.  

God Grak, I bow down to you and your infinite wisdom.

[NoelleNC]

Unlike you, I don't posit that I can make such a legal decision based on my own meandering imagination.

So you're not smart enough.  It's ok.  Just go ahead and say it.

You should already read up on advanced physics before you make fun of people who discuss, debate and even prove theories based on things we cannot actually do or do not actually exist.

I hate to break it to you, but what we are discussing is not physics. Here we go again with comparing very dissimilar situations... I've heard nothing but your imagination conjuring up science fiction. Give me the facts, dear Prophet. I'm sure not much will have changed by the time the human race splits in 2... 3? 4? Right? Not enough that we can't, in 2007, dictate the law for that period of time. Surely not.

[Grakthis]

If they can reproduce, probably. If not, no. If for some reason they bring down a plague upon our race and everyone starts dying, or all their children are born deformed and screwy, then even if they can reproduce I don't think it would be logical to allow the law to marry them. And if their presence causes a plague upon us, I don't think it'd be logical to allow them near us. Yay for bringing science fiction into reality.  

God Grak, I bow down to you and your infinite wisdom.

I didn't say a word about a plague.  Why are you introducing non-facts into this scenario.

If I asked you "What is 1+1?" would you say "that depends.  Like, if we're asking what is 1+1+200 then it's 202.  But if it's just 1+1 then it's 2."

Uh... I didn't ask what 1+1+200 is.  I asked what 1+1 is.  Stop being stupid.

science fiction is more real than you know.  50 years ago they would have told you the internet was science fiction.

So you'd support disallowing two humans who are genetically incapable of reproducing to marry.

Good.  Be consistent.  It's completely retarded and people will laugh at you anywhere that you express this opinion, but atleast you're being consistently retarded.

[Grakthis]

I hate to break it to you, but what we are discussing is not physics. Here we go again with comparing very dissimilar situations... I've heard nothing but your imagination conjuring up science fiction. Give me the facts, dear Prophet. I'm sure not much will have changed by the time the human race splits in 2... 3? 4? Right? Not enough that we can't, in 2007, dictate the law for that period of time. Surely not.

Aren't you like 20 something now?  Shouldn't you be more mature and, well, less clueless by now?  Or are you one of those ditzy types who can't think beyond the 15 meters in which she lives?

You know that there is a strongly supported theory of life on earth that says the first living cells came from space, right?

So, who's to say the same species of early life didn't fall on a similar planet to earth and a remarkably similar species didn't evolve that is, in every psychological and physical way, human except they are incapable of reproducing with us?

This is in no way impossible.  I mean, if you presume that evolution happened this way once, why not twice?

And we're not just talking about laws.  We're talking about the philosophical basis for a law.

Forget physics, the entire basis of causality and time travel are debated by scientists.  Are you suggesting we shouldn't discuss these things because they haven't happened yet?  Even though we have about 6 theories by which causality could be broken?

Do you refuse to consider possible outcomes of your actions because they haven't happened yet?  "I am not going to worry about what happens when I drop this rock on my foot, because it hasn't happened yet."

Pathetic.

[tylor2000]

I just want to point out that in science you have to have a control group and you have to have a theory which is fallible, that is, can be disproven and repeatable.  It has to be able to be disproven empirically.

[LimeTwister]

I'm confused...your whole argument is that straight people should get the title marriage because they can reproduce?

Then, should polygamy be legal?  Should a woman be allowed to marry someone if she continuously has abortions?  Should married people be allowed to use contraception?  Should Britney Spears still be with Kevin? Do you want to give her more?  Do all cows have spots?  Do cats bark?

You apparently didnt read WHY thats her argument, or if you did you didnt understand it.    So yes, you are definitely confused.

I don't care about WHY that's her argument, I care about THE argument.

Shit, her mother could have been married, became sterile and got a divorce from it...and that could be WHY that's her argument (not saying it is, just throwing it out there).

[NoelleNC]

Are you too stupid to look under my avatar and see that I am not 20, but 22?

And I exaggerated on purpose, in case you didn't catch on. Of course it's possible for there to be a non-threatening, closely related other species out there and our only significant difference would be the inability to reproduce. But uh, under my premise where everyone gets the same benefits, etc, other than the word marriage, what is so wrong with having another category for the type of bond between the "aliens" & us that also cannot reproduce because they are dissimilar from us? Even if they are almost identical to us, what is so stupid about giving them their own version of marriage, with it's own legal name.  

And now that I think about it, those aliens who can reproduce with us shouldn't be able to marry either. Oops. My bad. I know what 1+1= and now that I"m mulling it over even if these aliens almost equal 1, they are off a few decimals, so that doesn't work. Unless they are evolved exactly the same as us, they lose. haha.

I wouldn't push this in a court of law personally, I don't really care. I just think new words are helpful and maintain clarity and help to keep words from being diluted.

And at this point I'm just having fun. KISS MY BUTT GRAK

[NoelleNC]

Oh, and PS, just because they are similar to us doesn't mean it's stupid to consider they may carry other diseases and viruses to spread to us... so it'd be best to be careful of any laws built up around these new aliens when they first arrive. I exaggerated by calling upon a plague, but in theory it's not ridiculous as you tried to make it sound.

[Logikal X]

I don't care about WHY that's her argument, I care about THE argument.

You cant just walk around making arguments without anything to back up your claim/theory/idea.   So if you care about the argument you should really try to understand WHY the argument is being made.   You cant just dumb down anything you feel like because you cant keep up with basic concepts.