I’m really tired of dancing around this and trying to be nice.
I’ve seen your really cute church ads. I’ve heard you talk about how, in your whacky world of crazy, letting a gay couple marry would somehow infringe on your religious rights. How you’re doing it for the protection of ‘our children’ and how it’s really not about tolerance of ‘lifestyles’ but how it’s about you being ‘forced’ to accept same-sex unions.
Can I just say…YOU EVIL BASTARDS.
And I mean that with all the love in my heart.
This isn’t about religion or what you believe. This is about civil rights and your bigotry. Yes, your religion has made you a bigot. An evil, hating, horrible, bigot.
If you would like your children to not hear about anyone different from them, feel free to keep them the hell out of public schools and for that matter, public places. Because we here in the ‘public’ are not all like you and we allow our citizens, ALL OUR CITIZENS, the same rights.
I’m seeing YES ON PROP 8 signs in my neighborhood and I have half a mind to knock on their doors and ask them why they think bigotry is ok. Why they think denying rights to others is ok. Why they think their family is better than any other family. Why, exactly, they have SUCH EVIL IN THEIR HEARTS. And where the FUCK they get off with the smiling happy stick-figure family representing them on those fucked up signs.
If your religion does not allow you to marry someone of the same sex..then don’t. If your religion allows for bigotry, perhaps you should find another religion.
Seriously. I am disgusted. Absolutely disgusted by supporters of Prop 8.
I can see absolutely NO justification for this legislation other than you implementing your evil across California.
As my husband just said, Orthodox Jews can’t work on Saturdays…do we come up with legislation making it illegal for everyone to work on Saturdays?
It’s the same thing. You get that, right?
No. You don’t. Because you’re evil, and you some how think gays being allowed the same rights as you is bad.
Perhaps you need to live somewhere that doesn’t allow rights to all it’s citizens. Somewhere where everyone is just like you and thinks like you and lives like you.
Now, many of you will be very quick to point out the Obama-Biden take on gay marriage. And let us BE CLEAR about that record, shall we? I am not naive enough to think every candidate is perfect, and I am disappointed my candidates won’t go that extra mile for gay marriage. But let’s face it…it’s your fault.
You make up a large electorate and they can’t alienate half the country. I get that. They want to make sure all voices are heard in American, even the evil ones.
It’s WRONG, but I get it. I’m also proud that they’ve supported equal rights for the LGBT community and will not support any constitutional amendments defining marriage.
Now you, on the other hand…what’s your excuse? Your religion says gay is wrong? Your religion also says you should stone wicked kids, but…I digress.
Get your bigotry out of my state. Get it out of my schools and get it out of my country. ALL are welcome, and that means you too, if you can stay and play nice.
Forced toleration can suck sometimes. But hey, I have to tolerate you, so it works both ways.
Oh, and by the way…years from now, when this is looked back upon like the civil rights movement in the 60’s, and people ask you what side you were on…have fun explaining that one.
*updated 10/20/2008
I keep re-reading and re-reading this post because it’s gnawing at me and won’t seem to let me go. Yes, I am angry. I am very angry over this issue, and writing this was cathartic and let me push all my anger onto a blank page. But as the debate and venom continues over same-sex marriage, I’m worried my hitting ‘publish’ did more harm than good. That I just threw out something into the world that spewed just as much hate as the what I perceive to be coming at me from those who support this measure. To be clear, and as I said in comments, I do not believe all religions and all faiths are evil or bigoted. I found more love in some Christian friends and family than can be expressed. I’ve also seen entire Jewish communities condemn this measure and other faiths rally against discrimination and bigotry. But perhaps, what I keep getting as I re-read this…is a microcosm of what’s gotten so out of hand on this issue and in this entire election: we’re all just name calling and screaming at each other. I regret adding to that, I truly do…but it’s so hard when you feel pushed there. Pushed by whatever entities are at work. So I’m letting this post stand because it’s a fair representation of how I felt when I wrote it, it does-if you can get past the venom-convey all the things I find wrong about this measure and why it should be defeated. But it occurs to me that this entire fight…this battle…is over love. Who can love. How they can love. Why they can or can not love. And the last thing it needs is more hate thrown in. So before you add to the hundreds of comments here or continue to scream and yell, please take that into consideration. Love. -ekv
I… Love… You. Thank you so much for so eloquently putting everything about this issue that I’ve been trying to form into words.
I am so completely disgusted and ashamed of the way that my fellow citizens are reacting to this issue. It’s just the same as not allowing black people or women to vote, in principle.
Thank you, seriously. You’ve officially restored a piece of my faith in mankind.
“I’m seeing YES ON PROP 8 signs in my neighborhood and I have half a mind to knock on their doors and ask them why they think bigotry is ok. Why they think denying rights to others is ok. Why they think their family is better than any other family. Why, exactly, they have SUCH EVIL IN THEIR HEARTS. And where the FUCK they get off with the smiling happy stick-figure family representing them on those fucked up signs.”
You are absolutely right. You do have half a mind.
@ Jacob Diamond:
You need the state to recognize marriage for legal and estate reasons. Who gets your estate if you don’t have a will? Your partner. Who makes medical decisions for you if you’re not conscious? Your partner. Guaranteed by law.
Now, one of the problems with not allowing same-sex marriage is that gay couples don’t get those rights by default – they fall on next-of-kin rather than on the partner, even if they have been living together for 50 years. Not so with married or common law heterosexual couples. So long as the state provides benefits for married couples, it needs to define just what it means by marriage.
No reason other than religion for denying this “right” huh?
Let me first say that I’m pretty much a hardcore atheist and I do not support marriage “rights” for gay couples. Do I have anything against gay people? NO. Whatever someone wants to do is their own business. Moral issues in the normal sense are not what are at play here in my mind.
HOWEVER, the right to marry is not simply a symbolic issue, as I’m sure you understand. Married couples enjoy marriage benefits a.k.a. money from the citizenry in one way or another. In other words, married people usually get to pay less, while single people like myself have to pick up the slack. I don’t particularly like this, but it is reality.
What is my problem with gay marriage then? It’s that heterosexual couples have a way to actually ‘give back’ to society. I’m not talking about charity, I’m talking about people. Heterosexual couples can have children, which are the future of society. This is the justification for why it is fair for married couples to enjoy tax benefits – they are offsetting their lack of payment with another contribution to society.
Gay couples can not do this, can they? Why then, should they receive my money when I have no possible real gain from it? Sure they can work or things like that, but single people can do that. The only thing differentiating between couples and singles in terms of long term societal contribution is the fact that couples have children. In this sense homosexual couples are no different than single people. Therefore, I have no possible gain in allowing them to have marriage benefits.
There is your argument without the word “believe” in it.
P.S. I would like to reiterate that I have no moral problem with gay people themselves. Civil liberty absolutely covers that choice in a person’s life. Civil liberty does not say that someone can take from me, for themselves.
To “An actual thought” —
Should heterosexual couples be forced to submit to a fertility exam to ensure that they can have children before they are allowed to marry? Because they currently are not. Yet we let heterosexual couples who are unable — or unwilling — to have children, to wed.
So either marriage should only be permitted to those couples who already have children, or your argument is absurd.
Furthermore, gay couples can adopt. The value in a couple with children is not how those children were produced, but how they are raised. A gay couple is exactly as competent (and will sacrifice just as much, financially and otherwise) as a heterosexual couple in raising children.
So why shouldn’t society extend the benefits of marriage to them, per your argument?
Let me offer a rational thought to you, something your emo ranting, filthy-mouthed little self-centered brain probably isn’t accustomed to:
Gays ALREADY have the same rights to marry that straights do. Every gay man has the same right to marry a woman that a straight man does. Every gay woman has the same right to marry a man that every straight woman does.
What you and your kind are asking for are SPECIAL rights. You want a special dispensation to marry people of the same sex. Sorry, the answer to that request is “no.” Deny it as you might try (and I think that’s why you’re all bunged up and frustrated) this country has a very firmly established tradition of what marriage is, and it’s not between two people of the same gender. You people seem to think that it’s perfectly acceptable to bend the fabric of reality, social custom, decency, and tradition and to try to FORCE that opinion on the rest of us.
Let’s be perfectly clear, it’s not us who changed, it’s YOU. You’re the ones trying to re-engineer society and you’re alll pissy because we don’t want to go along with it.
I don’t want to. And you know what, I’m going to raise my son not to either. I’m going to raise my son to respect all people and to do good to all people, but I’m also going to imbue in him the good sense to be able to ascertain between a healthy lifestyle and one that perverts life. You people like to elevate tolerance to a level of preeminence. I’m going to teach my child that good judgment and discretion are more important.
It’s almost laughable, really, that you can point at hard working citizens of this country who raise healthy families, who strive to be ethical, moral, honest, and just in their dealings, and decry them as “bastards”, while defending and promoting lifestyles that revel in adulterous perversions and unnatural acts which are too base to even speak of. No wait, it is completely laughable.
You’re so screwed up that you’re elevating what’s bad over what’s good and you’re mad that people are standing between you and your goals. Let me make it clear that I am one of those people and I will not be moving out of your way.
Personally, I wouldn’t dream of treating a homosexual differently than I would anyone else, but by the same token I’ll be damned if you think I’m going to stand by and allow you to force your agenda on me, my family, and my country. Not happening.
Simply liking proposition 8 does not make you a bigot. To me, it seems that you are labeling all christians or prop 8 supporters bigots. I think that to be very wrong. I believe that the constitution should not be amended to ban gay marriage. One thing I don’t believe though, is that just because you believe in supporting prop 8, you are a bigot. I think that everyone has their own beliefs, and they have the right to express their beliefs without being struck down and called a bigot. Now, some people are against gay marriage because they believe that gays will have sex and gay sex is bad. I have 2 things against that; 1. Banning gay marriage doesn’t stop gay sex, and 2. Just because gays can’t have sex to “pro-create” doesn’t mean that straights will. Sex with condoms isn’t meant to pro-create. So, since you don’t want gays to have sex because they can’t procreate, you might as well ban sex with condoms and spermicide. That is all.
Michael…WRT An Actual Thought’s comments…
Children do best in families with a mother and a father. Heterosexual couples have the potential to create children (or adopt, with the best outcome assurance), and therefore the state should have an interest in this. Homosexual couples can marry all they want, but do not have this potential. (BTW, homosexual couples already have the same rights as state-sanctioned married couples, they just don’t have the title. The fight for “gay marriage” is ultimately about desire for their lifestyle to be legitimized by the state, which must ultimately be legitimized by the people.)
An often-overused logical extreme, but correct, is to look at the natural outcome if everyone chose this lifestyle. The result would be the end of humanity. Not a great outcome for the state.
The justifications for bigotry in this thread have really gotten absurd. How about you also ban all elderly couples from marrying too, since this is really about the kids.
And anyone who calls anything BUT heterosexuality indecent is a sick and sad, not the other way around.
Oh, and a bigot. lol 😉
And it’s my blog. I’ll rant and get pissy all I want. The ‘x’ is at the top right corner if you don’t like it.
#suckit
xoxoxoxxo
“Suckit”.
That’s about what I’d expect. LOL
Yes, all Christians are monsters because they don’t agree with you. Pardon me while I laugh in your face.
Do you ever read any of the crap that you write? Do you know how bigotted you sound? If you had half a clue, you’d realize that YOU epitomize the very characteristics (bigotry, narrow mindedness, intolerance) that you rail against.
If this is an “argument” in support of a position, Queenie, you’ve marginalized yourself to the point of absurdity.
Let me be the first, then, Queen:
Marriage between a human and an animal is indecent.
Marriage between an adult and a child is indecent.
California should not have an interest in sanctioning these activities, any more than homosexual “marriages”.
If this makes me “sick and sad”, let me wear that title proudly.
The video was like the cherry on top! I agree, religion has been allowed to make horrid mutations of what our Country is today. To be honest, it isn’t even about the spiritual beliefs, it is about control and hate. Stupid bitches suck!
Make no mistake, this is a war between standards and chaos.
Those seeking legalized marriage between same-sex couples think they have the “right” to this privilege. But if that’s the case, what about the three-some, or the four-some out there who will want this “right” next? If marriage between two men is okay, why not three men? Four?
Where do we stop? What basis do we use to draw the line? Queenie, answer me straight up, would you support marriage between two men and a woman? If not, why not? Wouldn’t denying marriage “rights” to them be the same bigotry that denies it to two men or two women?
Oh and someone please tell me why we started talking about marring dogs and kids? WTF? Let’s stay focused people, there are still other laws that would make this option null anyway. THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE! It is the same thing as saying something stupid and narrow minded in public, only it doesn’t go away and the crowd is larger. Jeez
Good point, Gleno.
If Prop 8 fails, maybe California should just declare everyone “married” to everyone else. A kind of “scorched earth” policy, making the word marriage meaningless.
: (
Hello Geno, can a man have two wives in “your World” cause here in reality there is still a law that stops ANYONE from having more than one spouse. This would then of course trickle down to the issue at hand. Four men? You people really can be shallow…..
I completely agree with Gleno. I did think that this was a somewhat respectable blog, but now that i see the terms that you are using (“suckit”) i know that i was completely wrong. I thought that you had open-minded ideals, but i now realize that you simply want to rant and rave about how christians are bigots. Webster defines a bigot as “a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.” Does that sound familiar? Sounds like you queeny. You seem to absolutely hate anyone who is against gay marriage. You don’t even consider the fact that others have their own opinions. Here is something you should try, take the idea of gay marriage, and look at it like a christian. How do you think they feel about gay marriage and why?
Note: I am agnostic, but I am at least open minded enough to look at things with others’ perspectives and recognize and respect their opinions.
I Stumbled onto this too, and hearing you make a reference to your husband made me so much happier reading this than finding out this was written by someone in a gay or lesbian relationship. I’ve read tons of arguments against Prop 8 from LGBT people but very few from allies to the community – and certainly none as cusstacular as this.
YAY ALLIES!!!
Woah, woah, woah, Anthony…
Let’s follow your liberal views to their logical conclusion:
You say it’s bigotted to restrict marriage to one man and one woman. Based on what, I’d like to know.
If we strike down that bias, what is the reasoning for striking it down? Queenie says it’s because it’s biased, based on Christian ideaology, and it’s unfair.
Well, if it’s unfair to prevent two women from marrying, why can’t three women marry? Or two men and a woman? There are plenty of people living in that “lifestyle”, why are they to be excluded? If you’re not going to let them marry then shouldn’t I call you an intolerant, sicko like Queenie wants to brand me?
Go ahead, flip your hair back, and dismissively wave your hand at me and tell me I’m being absurd. Because that’s precisely how I feel about your demands that gays be allowed to marry.
First of all, the last I checked animals and children were not consenting adults. I have no issues with what consenting adults wish to do. Get married, get divorced, or otherwise.
Your issue with the LGBT community is yours. If you can not accept the truth that your type of family is not the ONLY decent type of family, I feel sorry for you.
The is truly a civil rights issue, a HUMAN rights issue.
And the REASON why I am so vocal in this post, is because I’m very tired…very VERY tired of those supporting Prop 8 running around my state like they are saving mankind and doing GOOD.
They are bigots.
What really bothers me about the religious backing to the anti-gay marriage sentiment besides the bigotry is the hypocrisy. The law that says two men cannot “lay together” is in the book of Leviticus in the Old Testament. That book also says that you can’t shave, eat shrimp, or work on the Sabbath. However, nowhere in the bible does it say anything about gay women. I understand many Christian groups that follow the teachings of Jesus and the new testament, which generally contradicts the vast majority of the old testament, but if you think your justified in keeping your “moral” high ground while picking and choosing passages out of the same fucking book of the bible you have got another thing coming.
Grow up and learn to be a decent and intellectually honest human being. But maybe that’s asking too much of Proposition 8 supporters.
So in other words you don’t have anything other than emotion to answer with. OK, I just wanted you to make that fully clear to everyone reading.
By the way, declaring this a human rights issue doesn’t make it so.
Next time you want to blog about a random opinion you have, try to at least find some basis in reality for having that opinion.
The “Christian” point of view is to “not like” the idea because they “think” (I use that word loosely) it is wrong. Who is to say one is more right than the other? A vote? Either way, someone is going to not be happy. Does this mean that you have the right to decided for me? Or I for you? Hmmmm funny that just doesn’t flow to well for me. Some people should not marry, the end up bitter and pissy and make life hell for the rest of us with there notions of how life should be. On the other hand, I have had the pleasure of meeting several very happy married couples. Does this have anything to do with the blog? No, but everyone else is pulling at straws, so I though I would too!
Damn straight, Erin!
Okay, I’ve been derailed by the “actual thought” comment as I write this for it claims child-bearing to be the thing that legitimizes marriage. By this anonymous argument, the right to my own heterosexual marriage — childless as it is & shall remain — should be denied. In turn, the very Twitter friend whose recent & related post I was about to share has a daughter w/her wife thus their gay marriage does qualify. Furthermore, a fundamentalist Christian couple I know is planning to only adopt so their addition to future generations is not dependent on their heterosexuality either.
In further derailment, Gleno admits that marriage between different genders is but a tradition. When marrying my husband, I married the person I loved, not a man of my choosing (his gender was happenstance & simply how we roll). We were married by a pastor since we’re Christians but that’s not what afforded us the rights in question here. It was the license issued in conjunction with the certificate signed by a legal official, the 2 of us & our 2 witnesses. It’s that process that should be available to ANY two people willing to make a commitment to each other & each other’s well-being — thus the need to share in the rights afforded ‘legal’ marriages. It’s high time the concept of marriage was divorced from religion in accordance to the separation of church & state for not all marriages performed, regardless of sexuality, are religious in nature.
Back to my original comment content.. 😉 The Twitter friend I mentioned, @FiestyCharlie, is also a fellow blogger & recently posted a great video that I wanted to add to this mix; http://fiestycharliewrites.blogspot.com/2008/10/pass-it-on-shout-it.html 😮 As for the “Yes on 8” ads, they hurt my soul! 👿 See, fun fact, my soul’s very real to me due to the aforementioned Christianity. Inherent to those beliefs, I wholly believe in love & commitment, period.
(|_|*cheers*|_|)
“I think marriage is a civil contract. I don’t know what they’re raving about. We should all have the right to marry whomever we wish, whether it be male or female. That’s what the 14th amendment provides: equal protection of the law.” ~ Joseph Hansen
Simply saying someone is a bigot because they don’t agree with you doesn’t make them so. It simply makes you a bigot. If anyone has any real reason as to why proposition 8 should or should not pass, they should say so now.
Yep, keep slammin’ them Christians, because we all know how intellectual that makes you look.
It’s open season on them thar Christians, Hank!
But isn’t that the WHOLE point? I’m NOT deciding for you or you for me. YOU decide and do what you like.
And Gleno I’m confused what you’re looking for here- are my gay friends NOT adult and human and do they NOT deserve the same rights as you? Or have you classified them as some other specie I’m unware of thus far.
Marriage is a religious union. It always has been. It is simply recognized by the government as a union. On that level I have no problem with someone marrying a dog if they so choose, much less any other person, as long as there is a church willing to perform the ceremony.
The problem comes in when we consider that marriage is generally recognized by law for another reason. Procreation. Insurance companies offer spousal benefits historically so that a procreative couple would have more resources available for child raising. At this point gay couples are non procreative, but a gay marriage would allow tax benefits and insurance benefits that are centered around it. Really when you boil it down, that would be like me taking out spousal insurance at a reduced rate for my roomate, and claiming him on my taxes. Why should anyone else be required to subsidize a non procreative relationship with money intended to aid procreative couples.
Until that issue is fixed, then I am against gay marriage as legally recognized. Civilly I have no problem with it whatsoever.
Nice red herring, Queenie, but try to keep up, okay?
The question I asked you was pretty specific. Scroll back up and read it.
I never once said anything derogatory about gays. What I said was I fully oppose gay marriage. Moreover, they DO have the right to marry, just like any straight person does. What they want is special rights to marry people of their own gender. (By the way, by definition, that’s not what a marriage is.)
So one more time, let me ask you to step up and answer the question I asked you: If gays can marry, where do we draw the line? Should three men or three women be able to marry? If not, why not? If not, what aside from this supposed “bigotry” you are so quick to accuse others of prevents it?
What if they adopt?
So by that logic, anyone infertile shouldn’t be allowed to get married.
That’s um..insane.
Gleno your argument about gay marriage being a slippery slope to the downfall of society is weak, at best.
Four guys will marry two girls and dogs and cats and we’ll all go to hell in a handbasket!!!!!
Marriage is the union of two people and a right granted to adults in the United States. I believe those can be two people of any gender, because I believe all adults should have the same rights.
Now, personally I don’t give a shit if you marry 10 women, so long as it’s not hurting anyone else and all 10 women are consenting adults.
I’m not here to tell you what you ‘can’t’ do. Unlike Prop 8.
Anyway Gleno, I don’t flip my hair, and I’m not a die hard liberal. The fact remains that allowing same sex marriage would not, in my mind, raise the issue of Tom and Suzy bring Joe into the marrage. Several regions in the World may be ok with this, but I assure you that if people are this bent about same sex marriage, they won’t be voting a swinger law in anytime soon. I just guess I don’t see where you were going with that point, I do see that you are ridden with the same shallow stereotypes problem that you are belittling with the lovely comment “Go ahead, flip your hair back, and dismissively wave your hand at me and tell me I’m being absurd. Because that’s precisely how I feel about your demands that gays be allowed to marry.”
So when we strip away all this gray matter, we are left with “You don’t care what I think, and I don’t understand why you don’t?”
I’m weary from all the random and pointless blah blah, and to be honest I don’t want your beliefs anymore that you would want mine.
Yes, all Prop 8 supporters are bigots. I cannot wait until history proves them wrong. I remember when churches preached against inter-racial marriage, so I don’t think we have long to wait.
I’m totally flipping my hair now. Just ’cause.
So Queenie, you support the legal definition of marriage as being between ANY number of consenting adults. I think they already have an institution for that. (It’s called a company.)
Nevertheless, the bottom line is that your views, in spite of your emotional insistence that they are reasonable are (as is intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer) beyond fringe; they are radical, they are extreme leftist, and they are, unequivocably not what this country was, is, or (I truly hope) ever will be about.
You’re not talking about equality and fairness. You’re talking about the most extreme forms of moral relativism.
In more vulgar terms, Queenie, you’re a kook.
All laws are about what you can’t do. For each law, society has an interest in protecting something…in this case, marriage.
Queen, you admit there IS a slope, right? I believe this is why you aren’t answering Gleno’s question. Redefining marriage as something it’s not doesn’t make it so. This is why we’ve brought up other ridiculous “marriage” examples…to illustrate the point.
It would be akin to saying all three of my cars are Maseratis (they’re not). I’d LIKE them to be, but all the wishing in the world won’t magically transform them. Gay couples are doing the same wishful thinking about what their civil union is.
Extra credit question: Why do gay couples want this title (marriage) so badly?
@SB that’s pretty much exactly how I feel.
And I am in total love with my friends who are either religious, not a fan of same-sex marriage, or otherwise who have respectfully declined to support this measure because they understand.
Okay. Lets try this again.
A basic principle of government is that it should not interfere with people’s lives unless their actions harm other, non-consenting individuals. All other intervention is invalid. If I choose to marry a consenting person of the opposite sex, the government should butt out because no harm is being done to anyone. Now, if I choose to marry a person of the same sex, the government should also butt out – even if you believe that homosexuality is wrong, who is harmed other than the two consenting individuals who marry? No one. Why, then, should the government tell them they can’t marry?
Sorry Queen, I just read the part where you did answer Gleno’s question. And yes, the answer does make you look extreme fringe.
What? This Country wasn’t founded on freedom and equality for everyone one? Gleno, you better call the public school system and let them in on the secret, cause they are sooooo not teaching your anti-leftism crap when I graduated….
Why do you want to deny them the title? Do you love the title THAT much and feel it’s only for your man/woman unions?
There is NO slope when there are consenting adults involved and the government and YOU stay the hell out of it.
And seriously, you’re out of touch if you think civil rights are extreme, fringe and leftist. But I’ll wear that badge proudly if you so brand me.
Marriage is a union of LOVE and it’s not YOURS alone. Perhaps you should take your ‘get off my lawn’ attitude and head over to another blog now.
I’m flipping my hair now too! Are you happy now Gleno? I have fallin right into your stereotype trap!
Get ta steppin
I’m going to flip my hair WHILE wearing my crazy fringe liberal badge.
to TSC:
Full agreement buddy.
@ Anthony Upchurch
Well, if you want to get picky, no. The USA was not founded on freedom and equality for all. Women didn’t have the vote. Slavery existed – it’s even in the US constitution.
Now, that provides an interesting argument. Just because same-sex marriage wasn’t allowed when the country was founded doesn’t mean that things should not change. If it did, then that would mean that women still should have the vote, and that blacks should still be slaves. The argument is invalid – things can, do, and should change.
Nuts. That last paragraph should read “If it did, then that would mean that women still should NOT have the vote, and that blacks should still be slaves.”