My man I didn't say he doesn't care, he obviously does, I'm saying he's not out there campaigning for laws to stop gay marriage.
What was your problem with the quote anyway, that Shapiro is a liar and a fraud? (I'll back you on that) or do you have an issue even if everything said in the quote is true? you're on your own there as in general that's how I wish people handled differences.
i'm saying up until the supreme court ruling, ben was doing absolutely everything in his power to make sure gay people were not able to have the right to get married. in one of those mysterious coincidences in life, his position suddenly "evolved" around the exact same time the ruling was passed. do you think ben stopped talking about his opposition to legalized gay marriage because he suddenly became more tolerant?
imagine someone was about to rob a bank, but at the last minute they forgo that plan because they suddenly realized the bank hired like 10 armed security guards. then that same would be robber goes "you know, i never really cared about robbing that bank anyway!"
(Image removed from quote.)
That's a Dave Ruben quote yeah? I dont see what's wrong with it breh 
you think ben shapiro - let me reiterate, BEN FUCKING SHAPIRO - has no problem with lgbt people getting civil rights?
Presumably Shapiro is OK with it. But he's not OK in government "intervening" in marriage and "subdiziding" it. Which basically hollows civil marriage altogether, I'd assume ? Oh and that baker doesn't have to service you. He also thinks you're a sinner. Plus he won't come to your gay wedding (edit : Anniversary party in the exact quote... Same difference) even if you extend an invitation despite working for him and him pretending to have a cordial work relationship with you. He's OK with it to the extent he won't go out of his way to stone you.
him being okay with gay people as long as the government isn't involved is kind of an important detail, isn't it?
I thought it was pretty clear that "presumably OK... [lists of caveats] won't go out of his way to stone you" mean I don't put much stock to how far that tolerance goes.
sorry, figured that's what you meant, but i wanted to mention it just to be sure.
To be fair he's pretty straightforward about it, it's more Rubin that have trouble processing being told the bare faced truth to his face. Shaps won't even attend a marriage between people of differents faiths.
It depends on how convinced one is that in a libertarian fantasy you won't get fucked out of rights even without public backing.
i disagree with that, actually. i mean, he's straightforward when discussing it on the religious front, but he's a slippery little toad when it comes to the legal area. before the SC decision, he advocated that gay marriages should not be recognized by the government (straight marriages are just fine however). after the decision, suddenly his issue wasn't that gay marriages were getting recognized by the government, but that government was involved in marriage to begin with. an issue that again, for one of life's mysterious reasons, was never a concern that he ever brought up before the ruling.
