Homosexual Marriage

[Tibs]

omgitsLORDCARBO: If there is no mutual ideology in debate, then you cannot "truly" debate. For example, in drug debates, both parties agree that there should be little societal damage or agree in liberty, yet their methods of doing are different. Arguments that differ in ideology are a matter of trying to change people's morals and fundamental ideas.
omgitsLORDCARBO: Common sense tells us murder is bad, but is it? E.g. if I thought murder was good, you cannot really debate with me this. You'd need to convince me, and in a debating sense you'd be no better than me, forcing beliefs down my throat and vice-versa. We are all guilty of this same action in that sense.
omgitsLORDCARBO: Priority comes before ideology, but priority is still a matter of ideology. Priority... this principle is actually the key part of most foreign affairs, a good example being Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
omgitsLORDCARBO: Homosexual marriage is not a matter of method, it is a matter of ideology. One party supports liberty, the other does not. It is impossible to debate without rhetoric. And it is stupid to debate once somebody is clear on their ideology and you've presented your basic moral reasons why it's wrong.
omgitsLORDCARBO: We should all be banned.
omgitsLORDCARBO: fjasdlkjfasld;fja;lsj done