Algebra proves gays can’t marry

Posted on August 21, 2009. Filed under: Illogical, Irrational | Tags: , , |

“The constitution was not created with the power and athority to change basic algebraic laws.” – reader comment, regarding his algebraic proof that same sex marriage is not possible.

You know the phrase? I thought I’ve seen everything? When it comes to arguments against same sex marriage, I really thought I had heard them all. Even the absurd ones. But, truth is stranger than fiction. SammyHammer, responding to an article in the Wisconsin State Journal, makes a mathematical argument against same-sex marriage. Dabble tries to take him on.

Who knows, maybe SammyHammer is just playing mind games with people. Let’s hope so. Because otherwise, he’s in serious need of counseling.

I will say…. I laughed really hard at this.

Link to article and readers comments.

dabble wrote:

I’ll do it.

SammyHammer wrote:
No logical secular arguments?

1) Elementary math argument- if a man was 2, a woman was 1, and marriage was 3: how could gay marriage ever equal three?
2+2=4
1+1=2


That would work if it were true. But a man is 1 and woman is 1 and marriage is 2.
1 + 1 = 2. Always.

SammyHammer wrote:
2) Basic algebraic poof of inequality and constitutional limitations- if a man equals M and a woman equals W then gay marriage doesn’t equal marriage(marriage: a joining of two different things(M+W = W+M))
M+M /= M+W
W+W /= W+M
The constitution was not created with the power and athority to change basic algebraic laws.


No, and you were not created to change those rules either. Men and Women are Humans (H). They are equal. Marriage is a Partnership (P) of two equals. Man=H, Woman=H, and marriage=P.
H+H=P
That’s how it really works. Your way assumes men and women are not equal.

SammyHammer wrote:
3) Love being outside the definition of marriage argument-Marriage has almost never been a simple union of two people who imagine that they deeply care for one another. If two married people care for one another, good, nifty, special even, but caring for one another is not and never has been a defining element of marriage. To take it a step further, not “loving” the other partner isn’t valid grounds for a divorce. Getting a divorce because you don’t “love” your partner is merely “abandonment” and it sets you at lower than equal footing during a divorce. Giving two people of the same sex a marriage simply because they “love” one another is in no way shape or form equal to marriage. Furthermore it is altogether extraordinary of marriage and the government cannot legislate for one group of people to have special rights. less regulation is better by most people’s standards.


With a few exceptions, marriage has always been about two people who love each other, and divorce has always been about two people who don’t love each other any more.

SammyHammer wrote:
4) Unconstitutionality of domestic partnership- “Domestic partnership registry” doesn’t allow for the domestic partnership of one male and one female. Where is the equality in that? Why should a male and female have to form their partnership with more heavily regulated terms and conditions i.e. 50/50 assets etc.? Why should two people be excluted from the domestic partnership registry simply for virtue of being constituted of one man and one woman? Anything separate is not equal, domestic partnership is unconstitutional.


I really don’t know what the hell you mean by this. I think you’re saying if the laws for both types of marriage aren’t the same, then both types are being treated unconstitutionally.

I think I agree with that. The rules and regs for both types of marriage should be exactly the same. Which is why should abandon “marriage” for heterosexuals and make “domestic partnership” the legal definition for any couple of any sex who wish to partner with each other.

SammyHammer wrote:
Figure those and I’ll club you over the head with 5), 6) and 7).


That’s not much of a club you got there.

Dabble: while I really appreciate you taking the time and effort to address this issue mathematically, and your explanations are well reasoned and thoughtful, the whole premise comparing human relationships to an algebraic equation is just silly to begin with.

Advertisements

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

One Response to “Algebra proves gays can’t marry”

RSS Feed for Things People Said Today Comments RSS Feed

[…] Algebra proves gays can’t marry « Things People Said Today thingspeoplesaidtoday.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/algebra-proves-gays-cant-marry – view page – cached #RSS Feed Things People Said Today » Algebra proves gays can’t marry Comments Feed Things People Said Today Yea. Stop that coming out of the woodwork. NY LGBT youth center names residence for Bea Arthur — From the page […]


Where's The Comment Form?

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: