• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Court: CA gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional

Objective-J said:
ask me, the answer is no she didnt. My mom is an awesome caring kind loving person and Id be less without her but none of those qualities are dependent on her being a women. They depend on her heart, mind and love for me :shrug:

Sorry time and time again it has been proven that a child does equally well with any two caring loving guardians. This fact doesn't need your acceptance because it will still be a fact with or without it.
Click to expand...

Do you understand the team nuturing my left wing friend?
 
Navy Pride said:
You can always pull out bad examples but the good examples out weigh the bads ones a million to one.........The best way to raise a child is with a mother and father. It is hard enough to raise them that way as it is.
Click to expand...

Let's reexamine what you said:

Navy Pride said:
Sorry CC two men can not raise a child as good as a mother and father. a mother has a roll and no matter hoew a gay man pretends to be a wife or mother it just is not the same as having a real mother.
Click to expand...

So you take back that two gays cannot raise a child as good as a straight couple? The fact that you put yourself into a completely indefensiveness position and then try to weasel out it at the same time trying to salvage what microscopic specs of credibility you have left is utterly hilarious.

There are plenty of screwed up kids raised by straight parents. There are plenty of screwed up kids raised by gay parents. You cannot toss around massive broad statements like you do and expect NOT to get your proverbial *** kicked here.

And are you going to explicitly answer my question? Or are you as predicted going to cowardly weasel out of acting like a man?
 
Ontologuy said:
Prop 8 is simply about reiterating to CA administrators that there is one and only one proper set of recipients for a marriage licence: a man and a woman as husband and wife.
Click to expand...

The constitution already covers that. And it trumps a proposition, a referendum, or really anything else that can be voted on.

Navy Pride said:
At the very least a mother nurtures a child. a man no matter how hard he trys can not do that.
Click to expand...

Alright, I'm curious. What activities are you considering "nurturing", and what exactly precludes a father from doing them? Or is nurturing limited to breast feeding? Because, off the top of my head, that's the only thing a mother can do that a father cannot.
 
Navy Pride said:
Maybe, I hope God destroys the world before that happens.......It just might be the last straw for him.
Click to expand...

Apparently wiping out thousands of civilians in a blink of an eye is worse then gay marriage to God in your opinion. Mass systematical genocide and rape is worse then gay marriage to God in your opinion. Allowing millions to starve to death is worse then gay marriage to God in your opinion.

I'm not one to declare people Christians or not Christians, but your stance on God casts some serious doubt if you can ever be called a Christian with those beliefs of God.

at this point no state that has taken a vote has approved gay marriage...The only way it has been approved is by activist judges and in Iowa the judges that approved it were thrown out of office on their azz.
Click to expand...

Therefore removing Jim Crow laws were bad. Desegregation was bad. Allowing interracial marriage is bad. Do you ever learn your lesson about putting yourself is completely indefensible positions?

31 state have constitutional amendments defining marriage as a un ion between a man and a woman. There will be more in November including Washington State where I live. I am hoping we can take the senate and the presidency and get to work on a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. That would be nice before I kick the bucket.
Click to expand...

It's amusing you call yourself a God Fear Christian yet you have so much hate towards your fellow American.
 
Navy Pride said:
At the very least a mother nurtures a child. a man no matter how hard he trys can not do that.
Click to expand...

Oh really? And you know this, how? I'm quite nurturing with my son. I feed and take care of him every single day. My wife works the first half of the day and I work the last half. As for the feeding end of it, I take it you've never heard of formula fed babies, or mothers who bag and store their milk so that others can feed the child? Regardless, just because a lot of guys royally suck in that department doesn't mean that we all do. It's not like it's a part of male behavior to be incapable of nurturing.
 
obvious Child said:
Doesn't work that way. Navy Pride has been destroyed dozens of times here with logic and reason. He does not care about facts. At all.http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...gays-straights-shouldnt-share-housing-65.htmlNavy Pride considers gays to be little more than animals unable to control their base emotions.
Click to expand...
Logic and reason are not the only things considered in debate. I don't know NP, but if his beliefs come from religion/morals, well, you've reached an impasse. Did NP expressly say gays are little more than animals unable to control their base emotions? Having debated in the past relying solely on logic and reason, morality did not exist. Perhaps NP may be right on some of his beliefs.
 
Navy Pride said:
At the very least a mother nurtures a child. a man no matter how hard he trys can not do that.
Click to expand...

And again, I know it's futile, but can you document that wild assed claim? Debate is not making up **** you wish to be true.
 
CriticalThought said:
The defense for Prop 8 was that designating marriage for heterosexual cuoples was for the purpose of promoting procreation and optimal parenting.
Click to expand...

It is also supporting the establishment of a religion, hence unconstitutional.
 
Navy Pride said:
At the very least a mother nurtures a child. a man no matter how hard he trys can not do that.
Click to expand...

Really? You do know that you just insulted a lot of very nurturing fathers out there, right?

We have stay at home dads now. Mommy works, daddy keeps the kids. Provides the same nurturing sahm's do in other families.

There are also plenty of single fathers out there who have to provide the nurturing that can't be provided by a mother for whatever reason.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
Oh really? And you know this, how? I'm quite nurturing with my son. I feed and take care of him every single day. My wife works the first half of the day and I work the last half. As for the feeding end of it, I take it you've never heard of formula fed babies, or mothers who bag and store their milk so that others can feed the child? Regardless, just because a lot of guys royally suck in that department doesn't mean that we all do. It's not like it's a part of male behavior to be incapable of nurturing.
Click to expand...

I've heard that there is even a strap-on setup that can be worn by a man or woman to simulate breastfeeding.

Can't Breast-Feed? Just Strap 'Em On, Moms - or Dads - ParentDish

And, there have been some cases of men being able to breastfeed their children when the mothers died or were executed. (Not exactly sure how true these are, but sounds valid.) When I was pregnant, the nurses informed us that it was completely possible that male babies could come out "leaking" milk from their little nipples because of the hormones they would be exposed to during birth.

The Nursing Father

Men can produce milk. It is harder for them to do so, but not impossible.
 
Last edited:
roguenuke said:
I've heard that there is even a strap-on setup that can be worn by a man or woman to simulate breastfeeding.

Can't Breast-Feed? Just Strap 'Em On, Moms - or Dads - ParentDish

And, there have been some cases of men being able to breastfeed their children when the mothers died or were executed. (Not exactly sure how true these are, but sounds valid.) When I was pregnant, the nurses informed us that it was completely possible that male babies could come out "leaking" milk from their little nipples because of the hormones they would be exposed to during birth.

The Nursing Father

Men can produce milk. It is harder for them to do so, but not impossible.
Click to expand...

Well, I personally have never attempted that and I don't really intend to at this point. My son does just fine with a bottle. I have heard of it, though. But regardless, Navy's assertion that men are incapable of being nurturing is completely ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
Dr_Patrick said:
Well, I personally have never attempted that and I don't really intend to at this point. My son does just fine with a bottle. I have heard of it, though. But regardless, Navy's assertion that men are incapable of being nurturing is completely ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree.

I just find it funny that he doesn't realize that men can actually breastfeed but it doesn't matter even if they couldn't. Breastfeeding is not something all mothers can do either. It is not the end-all, be-all of what is nurturing. I loved breastfeeding my children, but that doesn't mean that if I couldn't have done so for whatever reason, that I would have been less nurturing than I am now.

As I believe you and CC pointed out, being nurturing has to do with the personality of the parent, not the sex/gender of the parent.
 
Navy Pride said:
Do you understand the team nuturing my left wing friend?
Click to expand...

Im guessing you mean "TERM" and yes I do and sure do and the fact remains my post is 100% true and you are 100% wrong. You are wrong 3 times actually.

1.) If their are 2 caring, loving parents it doesnt matter what they are
2.) im not your friend
3.) im not left wing

LOL
Seems you have lots of wrong OPINIONS
 
Navy Pride said:
At the very least a mother nurtures a child. a man no matter how hard he trys can not do that.
Click to expand...

NP... you know I like you, but this is the most invalid thing you have EVER posted at DP. Of course a man can nurture his child. That's part of being a parent... nurturing, regardless of the sex of the parent.
 
Ontologuy said:
And, of course, completely irrelevant to Prop 8.

Prop 8 is about marriage, not parenthood. Prop 8 seeks to reiterate for CA government administrators that there is one and only one set of proper recipients of a marriage license: a man and a woman as husband and wife.
Click to expand...

According to the proponents of Prop 8 parenthood is very relevent.

Courtesy of Hicup who provided this link originally
 
Kal'Stang said:
According to the proponents of Prop 8 parenthood is very relevent.

Courtesy of Hicup who provided this link originally
Click to expand...
No, that's not true as cited.

The link you cite indicates that was how the defense of Prop 8 was presented .. but, the only reason they went that route is because they weren't allowed to present the case the way it rightly should have been presented: http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-mainstream-media/118583-court-ca-gay-marriage-ban-unconstitutional-43.html#post1060196618.
 
Ontologuy said:
No, that's not true as cited.

The link you cite indicates that was how the defense of Prop 8 was presented .. but, the only reason they went that route is because they weren't allowed to present the case the way it rightly should have been presented: http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-mainstream-media/118583-court-ca-gay-marriage-ban-unconstitutional-43.html#post1060196618.
Click to expand...

If they were to argue purely on what the definition of the word marriage is then you would still lose. All that it would take to dismiss your definition of marriage is to prove that...

1: Gay marriage has happened in the past. (which it has) Wiki ~ Same-sex marriage ~ in the Ancient section

2: That the definition of the word marriage has changed in the past. (which it has) Marriage between the races was once considered "un-natural" and as such the definition of marriage included that concept.

3: That there are other, different types of marriages. (which there is) Polygamy, monogamy, and polyandry.

4: That the use of marriage has changed. (which it has) Marriage was once used as a way to make Houses stronger and or to settle disputes and love had absolutely nothing to do with marriage.
 
CriticalThought said:
The state is trying to enforce gender norms established by Christianity.
Click to expand...

And also held by a plethora of other religions and people throughout history as well. Murder is also something disallowed by Christianity, it must be a establishing religion to disallow that as well.

Sorry, but the stretch doesn't work. There's nothing at all in our constitution that denies indivdiual voters from using any method of philosophy or moral thinking in terms of what guides their hand in voting and there's nothing inherent in this law that specifically establishes Christianity as something citizens have to believe in or be ruled over by.
 
Zyphlin said:
There's nothing at all in our constitution that denies indivdiual voters from using any method of philosophy or moral thinking in terms of what guides their hand in voting...
Click to expand...

There is the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom