• 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!

Lesbian arrested for seeking marriage license in North Carolina

As a heterosexual man, if I love another heterosexual man, I'm still not allowed to marry him.

So much for your theory.

This argument always fails. You see, it's about the redress of grievances. People aren't petitioning to marry turtles or horses. Heterosexual men are not petitioning to marry other heterosexual men. However, homosexuals are, and in enough numbers to have political force. Whether you see them as morally equivalent or not is irrelevant to their political standing.
 
Excuse me but I love my brother very much. As we're both consenting adults why shouldn't we be allowed to enter into this 'strictly legal' contract? He has a few medical problems my military benefits could help with, AND it would save me the trouble of drafting a PoA, will, etc when I deploy again.

A love for a brother, or father, or friend is entirely different from the kind of love being talked about. I'm quite sure that you know that.

Here you are in this thread talking about how the OP's article lied, please don't make yourself a hypocrit by denying or twisting the type of love that is actually being talked about.
 
It is done all the time with blocking doors. Their are even those that kill the doctors. So yes the abortionist lawbreakers should be arrested as well. But it does make a point and brings issues to the court.

"Two wrongs do not make a right" is what my mother told me long ago. Murder is wrong even when done to prevent other murders (abortions)
 
The news article's title is deliberately deceptive. As noted by Jerry, she wasn't arrested for seeking a marriage licence, she was arrested for making a scene and refusing to leave.

Kind of like those pesky Civil Rights demonstrators in the 50's and 60's. A lot of them got arrested for not abiding by state law.
 
So you are just going to repeat yourself in the absence of a better argument?

The media takes a real event among normal people and lied about the facts so as to create a character that is an empty shell. By creating this "emptyshell", Mary Lee Bradford has become less of a person and more ofsomething the casual reader can wear, like a hair cut. I'm going to refer to as "Mullet" from here on-out. The media has taken this incident and created ameme out of it.

****
Since your thread title claims that only one person was arrested, when in fact Mary Jamis was also arrested, Mary Jamis no longer exists at all.

****
You say Mullit was arrested for seeking a marriage license. Mullit was arrested for trespassing, and you knew this, so you lied.
 
Last edited:
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Themedia takes a real event among normal people and lied about the facts so as tocreate a character that is an empty shell. By creating this "emptyshell", [/FONT]
Mary Lee Bradford has become less of a person and more ofsomething the casual reader can wear, like a hair cut. I'm going to refer to[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif] as "[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Mullet[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]" from here onout.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]The media has taken this incident and created ameme out of it.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]****[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]Since your thread title claims that only one person was arrested, when in fact Mary Jamis was also [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]arrested[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif], [/FONT]Mary Jamis[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif] no longer exists at all.

****
You say Mullit was arrested for seeking a marriage license. Mullit was arrested for trespassing, and you knew this, so you lied.
[/FONT]

You are really reaching now.

Mary Jamis, 52, of Mocksville, and a heterosexual friend who joined the protest, Mary Lea Bradford of Winston-Salem, were arrested after they blocked the entrance to the marriage license office and refused to leave more than 30 minutes after closing time.

Also there is an example of the article not mentioning her companion as you so eloquently complained about ...
 
Lesbian women, are not "it"s. They are people.
If this were true then it would have been reflected in the OP.

OP, however, dehumanized 2 individuals by completely ignoring the existence of one, and only referring to the other by it's sexual orientation. Therefore it is not a person, it is Mullet, and it was arrested for trespassing, not seeking a SSM.
 
Last edited:
If this were true then it would have been reflected in the OP.OP, however, dehumanized 2 individuals by completely ignoring the existence of one, and only referring to the other by it's sexual orientation. Therefore it is not a person, it is Mullet, and it was arrested for trespassing, not seeking a SSM.

lesbians are not human beings, in your eyes?

that's pretty sick & hateful. what made you come to such a sad & angry stance?
 
It is related. You said that in NC gays do not have the right to legally marry each other. I said that in the 1960s black people did not have the right to eat at the same restaurants as white people. Explain to me why race is irrelevant when the scenarios are almost exactly the same.

I have always been a big fan of civil rights, particularly where race is involved. But marriage MEANS the union of one man with one woman. Publishing dictionaries with a different definition does NOT change that.
 
I have always been a big fan of civil rights, particularly where race is involved. But marriage MEANS the union of one man with one woman. Publishing dictionaries with a different definition does NOT change that.

To you, but not to me.
 
lesbians are not human beings, in your eyes?

that's pretty sick & hateful. what made you come to such a sad & angry stance?

He's just taking things to logical absurdity to try and maintain an argument, its amusing to watch.
 
I have always been a big fan of civil rights, particularly where race is involved. But marriage MEANS the union of one man with one woman.....

no, marriage means the union of individuals through love & commitment.

that can be one man & one woman, one man & five women, one women & five men, two men, or two women.

hell, the Bible NEVER defines marriage as between one woman & one man. Just look at all of Moses' wives.
 
no, its frightening. when you dehumanize adult human beings, you're one step closer to excusing their murder.

Ok. Now you are being equally absurd.
 
You do have the right to marry the person you love if that person is of the opposite gender.

Yup, and you have this right also.

We do not have that right...

Yes you do. You can marry anyone of the opposite sex who can otherwise marry, that you choose.

...because we love (in the marital sense) people of the same gender...

This is about the sexes of the people involved, not their sexual orientations. Who has what sexual orientation is precluded form the discussion the moment gays claimed discrimination based on sex.

so yes there is a definite civil rights issue.

There is no civil rights issue at all.
 
You've just defined the Civil Rights movement. Can the guys with hoods be far behind?

Two wrongs do not make a right, as I already said. Harassment, torture, murder and other personal crimes are wrong, regardless of the motives in committing them.
 
lesbians are not human beings, in your eyes?
Mullet is not a human being, Mullet is a hair style anyone can wear. Mullet was arrested for trespassing, not seeking a SSM.
 
Yup, and you have this right also.

Yes you do. You can marry anyone of the opposite sex who can otherwise marry, that you choose.

This is about the sexes of the people involved, not their sexual orientations. Who has what sexual orientation is precluded form the discussion the moment gays claimed discrimination based on sex.

There is no civil rights issue at all.

And you just made the SAME type of arguement that those that were against interracial marriages made back in the day. Good Job! :applaud

The arguement wasn't valid then...it sure isn't valid now.
 
no, its frightening. when you dehumanize adult human beings, you're one step closer to excusing their murder.
According to OP, they're not women or human beings, they're lesbians, little more than life-support for their sexual orientation. Flesh dolls.

I was going to name the other lesbian Flannel, but since OP insists the other lesbian didn't exist at all, there is only Mullet, who was arrested for trespassing, not seeking a SSM.
 
According to OP, they're not women or human beings, they're lesbians, little more than life-support for their sexual orientation. Flesh dolls....

you're being very dishonest.

clearly, referring to them as lesbians was simply shorthand for "lesbian women".

you however, seem to want to totally strip them of their humanity & personhood.

why? what about lesbian women makes you soo angry?
 
The media takes a real event among normal people and lied about the facts so as to create a character that is an empty shell. By creating this "emptyshell", Mary Lee Bradford has become less of a person and more ofsomething the casual reader can wear, like a hair cut. I'm going to refer to as "Mullet" from here on-out. The media has taken this incident and created ameme out of it.

****
Since your thread title claims that only one person was arrested, when in fact Mary Jamis was also arrested, Mary Jamis no longer exists at all.

****
You say Mullit was arrested for seeking a marriage license. Mullit was arrested for trespassing, and you knew this, so you lied.

Actually the article clearly states that only the one woman was a lesbian. The other was her heterosexual friend.
 
Back
Top Bottom