• 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!

Supreme Court will tackle same-sex marriage

KevinKohler said:
And what young people are going to vote for a bunch of stogy old white guys? Because that's the current perception. And it's bleeding the party. Not saying that supporting equal rights for same sex marriage is a magic bullet...it DOES go a long way from separating them from you're grandma's republican party, so to speak. If you can't support equal rights, what thinking person is going to vote for you, period? And our younger politically minded folks? They are THINKING people. Cold hard truth. Why do you think so many of them join the libertarian party?
Click to expand...

They support pot-smoking.
 
Fisher said:
They support pot-smoking.
Click to expand...

Then you simply don't read ANY of the posts here by self described libertarians.


Anyway, I'm done, don't give a ****, I am not a republicrat, and don't care about that crap party to begin with.
 
KevinKohler said:
Then you simply don't read ANY of the posts here by self described libertarians.


Anyway, I'm done, don't give a ****, I am not a republicrat, and don't care about that crap party to begin with.
Click to expand...

Sure I do. Crotchedy old Libertarians, not 18 year old Libertarians which is what you seemed to be referring to.
 
Tigger said:
I know what they are, I just don't believe in them O-J.
Click to expand...

no you have no clue what they are, you proved that when you mentioned "cannibals, pedophiles and rapists" these have NOTHING to do with equal rights and it shows how vastly uneducated you are about this subject.

But i do agree with you in on regard even if you DID understand equal rights, which you do not, im sure you dont believe in them.
 
Fisher said:
Perhaps. I am not a republican but from my perspective, it is an issue of money. Businesses do not want to be subject to another discrimination cause of action against them and nobody seems to have a clue what same-sex marriage costs will be to the public, let alone private enterprise, when all those benefits are layered on.
Click to expand...

Do you really think that ALL 3-5% of the population that are homosexual are going to get married?
As far as the government benefits, we pay taxes too, and should have access to the benefits that we are paying for you to have.
 
wolfsgirl said:
Do you really think that ALL 3-5% of the population that are homosexual are going to get married?
As far as the government benefits, we pay taxes too, and should have access to the benefits that we are paying for you to have.
Click to expand...

I think that money matters more than morals or popularity in moving the GOP platform. No more, no less. I have no idea how many gays will or will not get married. I really don't care if they do or if they do not--does not affect me one way or the other.
 
Fisher said:
I think that money matters more than morals or popularity in moving the GOP platform. No more, no less. I have no idea how many gays will or will not get married. I really don't care if they do or if they do not--does not affect me one way or the other.
Click to expand...

If money matters, then they should look at the licensing fees that can be collected, and the taxes on wedding related services. That is money that could be coming in to state coffers.
Same sex marriage in Maine is expected to boost tax revenue by $16 MILLION dollars as reported by the sun journal.
In the past 5 years Mass had a tax revenue of $111 Million. From SSM alone.

In 2004 the CBO found that the federal government would collect about $1 BILLION dollars each year if SSM were legal in all 50 states.

There's the money.
 
wolfsgirl said:
If money matters, then they should look at the licensing fees that can be collected, and the taxes on wedding related services. That is money that could be coming in to state coffers.
Same sex marriage in Maine is expected to boost tax revenue by $16 MILLION dollars as reported by the sun journal.
In the past 5 years Mass had a tax revenue of $111 Million. From SSM alone.

In 2004 the CBO found that the federal government would collect about $1 BILLION dollars each year if SSM were legal in all 50 states.

There's the money.
Click to expand...

I assume the Maine estimate works on the assumption that not all other states will have it. do you have a link to the CBO report though? Not that I do not believe you but I would be interested in discerning what assumptions they are making to come up with that number
 
Fisher said:
I assume the Maine estimate works on the assumption that not all other states will have it. do you have a link to the CBO report though? Not that I do not believe you but I would be interested in discerning what assumptions they are making to come up with that number
Click to expand...

I'm on my phone, and haven't figured out how to link on this thing. But I will look for it tomorrow when I'm back on my laptop.

CBO | The Potential Budgetary Impact of Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages

See if that will work.
 
Last edited:
I was going by a news story, the actual CBO report says less than $1 Billion a year. I'm still reading the report.
 
Boo Radley said:
No one wants Roe V Wade changed. If republicans had wanted it challenged, it would have been overturned long ago. So, politically, no one REALLY opposes it.
Click to expand...


Are you kidding me? Just let one more Conservative Justice get on the court and you will see.
 
Boo Radley said:
No one wants Roe V Wade changed. If republicans had wanted it challenged, it would have been overturned long ago. So, politically, no one REALLY opposes it.
Click to expand...


I agree the majority dont really "politically" oppose it because they know that outlawing it is the wrong move, a infringement of rights, wouldnt solve anything and in ways make things worse. Mostly banning it or mostly letting it be totally unrestricted are BOTH wrong answers. Pro-Choice with restrictions is the best way to go and only way to try to be fair and equal and not infringe on current rights.
 
Last edited:
RepublicanMcDuc said:
Being against gay rights tarnishes the party's reputation and makes some voters, especially the younger ones, think of it as the party of bigotry. You are right that immigration is probably one of the most important areas to address in terms of voting groups, but you are wrong if you think the party's anti- gay stances aren't a problem both now and in the future. We gotta stop the bleeding.
Click to expand...

No one is against gay rights, that is what you on the left forget............We just don't want the definition of marriage changed............call it anyhting you want............give them every right a straight has..........just don't defile straight marriage............is that to hard?
 
Navy Pride said:
No one is against gay rights, that is what you on the left forget............We just don't want the definition of marriage changed............call it anyhting you want............give them every right a straight has..........just don't defile straight marriage............is that to hard?
Click to expand...

then you simply dont understand what equal rights are, nor would marriage be "defiled" lol :shrug:
 
Navy Pride said:
Are you kidding me? Just let one more Conservative Justice get on the court and you will see.
Click to expand...

You haven't been paying attention. Judges place by conservatives have backed Roe v Wade.
 
Fisher said:
I guess we are just going to have to disagree because the majority of gays have been democrats as long as I can recall and will be long after I am gone. It is just a reality that there is nothing the GOP can do to win the bulk of that demo. They need to focus on immigration. Bush has some interesting ideas before 9/11 happened in that regard.
Click to expand...

It's not just about people who are gay. It's about people who are not gay but think gay people being treated as second-class citizens is abhorrent.

Immigration is certainly another problem area for them. I don't think the GOP will get it, though. Even now their talk about immigration seems more cosmetic than anything. How do we seem more appealing to minorities, not how do we be more appealing.
 
Fisher said:
Perhaps. I am not a republican but from my perspective, it is an issue of money. Businesses do not want to be subject to another discrimination cause of action against them and nobody seems to have a clue what same-sex marriage costs will be to the public, let alone private enterprise, when all those benefits are layered on.
Click to expand...

It won't cost anything according to the Congressional Budget Committee study that was done within the last 10 years. They determined that the government makes money (not much, but a little) off of married couples because there is some things that cost the taxpayers with marriage but others that actually save the taxpayers money.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE STUDY: SAME-SEX MARRIAGE WOULD SAVE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ALMOST ONE BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR - Equality California
CBO | The Potential Budgetary Impact of Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages
 
roguenuke said:
It won't cost anything according to the Congressional Budget Committee study that was done within the last 10 years. They determined that the government makes money (not much, but a little) off of married couples because there is some things that cost the taxpayers with marriage but others that actually save the taxpayers money.

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE STUDY: SAME-SEX MARRIAGE WOULD SAVE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ALMOST ONE BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR - Equality California
CBO | The Potential Budgetary Impact of Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages
Click to expand...

Interesting but highly speculative on the part of the CBO. (The actual report: CBO | The Potential Budgetary Impact of Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages ) I do not anticipate that the marriage penalty will last long when it returns next year which is where a lot of the revenue seems to have been assumed to come from. I am equally skeptical that the other revenue numbers will materialize anytime soon as the report assumes that SSM marriage will include SS adoption of kids who receive medicaid etc and they will leave their estates to the kids instead of to charity and therefore create estate tax revenue. People who may be okay with SSM may not be so okay with two gay men adopting boys. That is going to be a tougher row to hoe IMHO.
 
Fisher said:
Interesting but highly speculative on the part of the CBO. (The actual report: CBO | The Potential Budgetary Impact of Recognizing Same-Sex Marriages ) I do not anticipate that the marriage penalty will last long when it returns next year which is where a lot of the revenue seems to have been assumed to come from. I am equally skeptical that the other revenue numbers will materialize anytime soon as the report assumes that SSM marriage will include SS adoption of kids who receive medicaid etc and they will leave their estates to the kids instead of to charity and therefore create estate tax revenue. People who may be okay with SSM may not be so okay with two gay men adopting boys. That is going to be a tougher row to hoe IMHO.
Click to expand...

Don't really care how comfortable they are with it. Two-parent, same-sex households do just as well as two-parent, heterosexual households in the realm of raising children. There's plenty of research to support this.

Some people think the moon landing was faked. Their opinion should not be considered when deciding policy regarding our space program.
 
Deuce said:
Don't really care how comfortable they are with it. Two-parent, same-sex households do just as well as two-parent, heterosexual households in the realm of raising children. There's plenty of research to support this.

Some people think the moon landing was faked. Their opinion should not be considered when deciding policy regarding our space program.
Click to expand...

There is plenty of reality that there is a double standard when it comes to lesbians and gay men when it comes to putting children of the same gender in the household due in no small part to the predatory nature of some gay men, or are you saying all those Catholic priest sex abuse cases were faked like the moon landing?
 
Fisher said:
There is plenty of reality that there is a double standard when it comes to lesbians and gay men when it comes to putting children of the same gender in the household due in no small part to the predatory nature of some gay men, or are you saying all those Catholic priest sex abuse cases were faked like the moon landing?
Click to expand...

uhm what does "Catholic priest sex abuse cases" have to do with gays?
 
Objective-J said:
uhm what does "Catholic priest sex abuse cases" have to do with gays?
Click to expand...

People don't mind entrusting kids to lesbians. They have been doing it for generations in the school system without incident. They are not going to be inclined to let little boys be adopted into homes of gay men given the history of some gay men abusing positions of trust over children--church, Scouts, etc. If you look at a lot of websites for foreign adoption agencies, some will not let any SS couple adopt, but others will only let single women/lesbian couples and not single men/gay couples. It is a powerful stigma that would have to be overcome and I think a much bigger hurdle than the marriage one.
 
Fisher said:
People don't mind entrusting kids to lesbians. They have been doing it for generations in the school system without incident. They are not going to be inclined to let little boys be adopted into homes of gay men given the history of some gay men abusing positions of trust over children--church, Scouts, etc. If you look at a lot of websites for foreign adoption agencies, some will not let any SS couple adopt, but others will only let single women/lesbian couples and not single men/gay couples. It is a powerful stigma that would have to be overcome and I think a much bigger hurdle than the marriage one.
Click to expand...

wow, well those people would have absolutely no clue what they were talking about, only a complete uneducated and or bigoted moron would relate the two subjects.

being gay has ZERO to do with being a pedophile so i wouldnt worry about retards and idiots that falsely think that way. One really couldnt make themselves look any more dumb if they brought that up as a concern.
 
Objective-J said:
But i do agree with you in on regard even if you DID understand equal rights, which you do not, im sure you dont believe in them.
Click to expand...

At least there's something we can agree on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom