well actually your example is weak and we're talking election now ... Trump did stop listening to Fauci months ago and even hired someone who held views that Trump wanted to represent the White House view ...

Yes, but the argument is categorizing and black box labeling when the vast population is especially diverse only narrowed and funneled into dichotomies

> I didn't propose a test.
@Philip R Of course you wouldn't. You get to continue selecting what is evidence based in whether something is convenient to your position. Twice that I've noticed, although I haven't been paying strict attention.

Yes, marriage is a sacrament of faith. Sex is a biochemical social activity. The latter does not require the former.

So you're claiming that Trump used to be open to opposing views, but no longer is?

Government may not enforce religion...big difference

All words are categorizing. Without categorizing there are no words.

Marriage is a way that we were designed to operate. Just like sex.

Trump clips naysayers as a matter of routine. This is not news.

@Zuluzeit, you just advanced to level 38!

Trump has never been open to opposing views ... it's always been his way or the highway

Trump never doubles down.

I've heard it all now.

not when he can triple and quadruple and maybe even bigly down

And yet in your previous reply you made a distinction between then and now, in order to dismiiss my evidence that he IS open to opposing views.

> Trump has never been open to opposing views ... it's always been his way or the highway
@meglide To be fair, he has never had a reason to be otherwise.

Government may not establish nor be a religion. Marriage licenses are a holdover from the Queen of England being the head of both church and state. They are not legitimate under the Constitution.

A two party system from which one must choose

Soon to be a one-party system if this keeps up.

no just because he wasn't as quick to fire folks in the past does not mean he ever really listened to an opposing view

Are you making a distinction between marriage and marriage licences? My point is that it is legitimate to regulate marriage (whether that involves a licence or not), because marriage is a fundamental part of being, just as it's legitimate to regulate other matters, such as business, social interaction (e.g. not allowing theft, murder, etc.).

There are many positions within a Venn diagram.

The Collaboratist Party of China.

But I didn't just claim that he didn't fire Fauci. I pointed out that he listened and acted.

Yay!

Guess that means the left wins, and this was your goal?

he didn't listen when it wasn't what he wanted to hear

Everything the state does is enforced at the point of a gun via police, fbi etc so everything it does should be determined as legitimate in the context of the legitimacy of making people obey you by threatening to harm them

There is no legitimate purpose for the state to regulate interpersonal relationship choices.

Obey

Are you claiming that he wanted to hear that there was a pandemic starting? What's your evidence?

So the state should not ban rape?

Though allows for religion and freedom to worship and choose faith in accord to ones belief system. Marriage can be a sacrament under god of choice but also is a binding commitment regardless of religion.

don't know ... so let's stick with what we do know, we do know that he does not want to hear that he lost and we know that his actions regarding not listening to anyone that tells him that he lost are as I described

They get alienated and called a RINO.

Chastised and cast aside.

Inconvenient. Therefore not evidence.

Business is a market transaction which means it effects the economy which means it determines the capacity of national security as a social function. Marriage is and is always an interpersonal, not governmental affair which recreates the Creati Mundi in the relation of the sacred and the human. Financial dependency and all political actions which the state effects using the marriage license can be done through other government records, such as the declaration of dependents on an income tax form.

Part of what we know is that he has listed to things he didn't want to hear. And we also know that there is good reason to think that he was cheated out of the election, so it is not in evidence that he simply doesn't want to hear that.

Secretly Trump was a communist the whole time, fracturing the GOP to leave the democrats the single-party ruler of the US.

_clap._