--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > > > Keep arguing about gay marriage if you want, Raunchy. > > > You may do so believing that you are "liberal" on the > > > issue. All I see is another form of agenda-laden > > > repressed behavior, on both sides. > > > > Barry thinks I should stop talking about agenda-laden > > gay marriage and talk about agenda-laden polyamory instead. > > You can talk about anything you want, and will. :-) > > I *never* tried to stop you. I merely added a > new element to the mix, *expanded* the discussion. > YOU reacted to this by saying: > > > > I haven't said anything about polyamory. That's your little > > > piece of bait you've thrown into the mix with the same intent > > > to obfuscate and derail a discussion of gay marriage as Shemp. > > In short, you accused ME of trying to "derail" > the thing that YOU wanted to talk about, for > merely introducing a side topic that was more > interesting to me. You continue to do so. >
Barry seems to have forgotten that it was Shemp who wanted to discuss gay marriage from his anti-gay POV using the box turtle, and slippery slope arguments and that Shemp initiated the discussion with "What about that disgusting butt thing the guys do?" My point to Shemp was that using such arguments do not support a case against gay marriage. It's simply a ploy of the rightwing to avoid discussing issues about gay marriage that DO matter. In context of the discussion I saw Barry's polyamory "sidebar" as another box turtle added to Shemps list of types of marriages we must accept if we want to accept gay marriage. The purpose of such meanderings is to derail a discussion of gay marriage on issues such as: Adoption Hospital visitation rights Transfer of property upon the death of a spouse Non-discrimination in the workplace Hate crimes Tax, Health and Economic benefits Shared property Repeal of Don't ask don't tell Repeal of DOMA > You have the right to continue to argue gay > marriage with anyone who cares to do so. I am > under no obligation to stick to that limited > (and, in my opinion, narrow and pathetic) topic, > and have the right to introduce "sidebars." > > What happened is that YOU DIDN'T LIKE the > sidebar, because it gave other people a chance > to talk about something else than the thing you > wanted them to talk about. > No one took Barry's bait to talk about polyamory so he could prove (once again) what prudes we are on FFLife and how sexually free he is. Now he's mad about it and wants to blames me for everyone's lack of interest in his topic. > YOU are the one trying to control what's talked > about here, Raunchy, not me. Talk *all you want* > about gay marriage. I don't have to. And if I > want to introduce a sidebar topic into a thread > that YOU want to go the way that YOU want it to, > tough shit for you. > Barry is mad that his polyamory train collided with the gay marriage train. > So far, only one person has expressed much interest > in the IMO more interesting topic of sexuality free > of puritanical "rules and regs." That's one more > than last time. Not bad for a forum full of sexual > barbarians. :-) :-) :-) > Spoken like a true libertine: "All you folks on FFLife are just a bunch of barbaric prudes and I'm not."
