SSM Plebiscite

[mateinone]

I am not mixing up anything Paul.
I am discussing hypothetical situations where relationships are currently restricted/forbidden due to the law and pointing out that the same people who claim that preventing people from a form of relationship (SSM) would almost certainly be against other relationships (ie incest). So the argument that people have no right (which is what a large percent of YES votes are saying) is hypocrisy.

It doesn't matter whether people want to marry in incest and I find it almost unbelievable that you are not understanding the pretext of why that is raised.

You are stating that if they want to marry, then you think there should be discussion
You have denigrated suggestions that the YES campaign is run in a bigoted and bullying way, because look at what they have been through.

Your last comment "If they have a case let's hear it"

Suggests that people have the right to hear and to determine.

The entire argument I have put forward for why this needs to be done in a respectful manner and in pointing out that people do already make judgment on what is acceptable and what is not is completely lost on you.
I don't know how it is lost on you, I don't how you think it is actually about allowing polygamous or incest and there being any tie, but if I can't explain it to you in the number of posts I have, then I am not going to be able to.

Let's say this
I disagree with people attacking people for their view. THAT IS THE ABSOLUTE ESSENCE OF WHAT BIGOTRY IS
I don't have to agree with a persons view to understand that it is a cornerstone of our society that people are allowed to  have their view
That I DON'T consider this a human rights issue.

Outside of that Paul, you are not engaging in the discussion, perhaps we both are not, so I leave you the freedom to voice your opinion, but don't see any point in debating back with you.