Page 117 of 159 FirstFirst ... 1767107115116117118119127 ... LastLast
Results 1,161 to 1,170 of 1585

Thread: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

  1. #1161
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,165

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Heterosexuality is, basically, just about having children.
    I'm unable to have children. Does that mean I'm not a heterosexual?


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  2. #1162
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    LOL!!! You are a very confused individual. There was no case made that homosexuals comprise a group that contributes in any special way to society. Religion does. Homosexuality does not. By your argument, any group, defined by any behavior, would and could be a suspect class merely because some individuals in the group have contributed something of value to society at one time or another.

    You have poor reasoning and if you are young and have ideas about going to law school, do yourself a favor and forget about it.
    I would easily argue that religion contributes very little to society as we gain more knowledge about the world around us. Beliefs and values and even individual morals that include compassion and concern for others contribute to society a great deal, but people don't need religion for these things.

    Homosexuality contributes plenty to society. It provides a buffer, even if only slightly, to overpopulation. Homosexuals are likely to only have children they actually want, certainly much more likely than heterosexuals. And homosexuals are fewer people adding to the population increase, which is a serious issue, whether some wish to recognize it as such or not. Homosexuality provides couples willing to take in children that heterosexual couples are less likely to take in because of their defects. Homosexuality provides yet another example of diversity in families and people.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  3. #1163
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    The criteria is "contribute in a meaningful way", not special, not wonderful. You admitted that homosexuals DO contribute POSITIVELY like many other groups.
    Not as a group. The "Gay Group" can take no credit for any meaningful contribution to society that I can think of even if individuals within that group are functioning and productive members of society.

    Homosexuals DO, remember, this is about the GROUP, not the characteristic.
    And that's where your argument falls off a cliff. You want to attribute any productive activity by any member of the group to the "group". As I said before, that makes any group with any productive member of society "contribute in a meaningful way" just as much as the "gay group".

    This is a stupid statement, you either do not know the criteria for suspect groups, 2 of the criteria are that they contribute meaningfully to society ANS are discriminated against.
    And if your argument held water in the supreme court, you'd already have what you wanted, wouldn't you? It will be difficult to prove either point - that "as a group" the 'homosexual group" contributes meaningfully to society any more than the group of "red haired people" contribute meaningfully to society or that they are discriminated against because unlike red-haired people, you can't tell someone is a homosexual except by their behavior. They don't look different. They don't have any distinguishing marks. They don't wear distinguishing symbols. They don't have any uniformity at all. So how do you argue that an indistinguishable group gets "discriminated against"?

    It doesn't take a student to destroy your arguments.
    I don't know what it takes but that wasn't it.

  4. #1164
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    I would easily argue that religion contributes very little to society as we gain more knowledge about the world around us. Beliefs and values and even individual morals that include compassion and concern for others contribute to society a great deal, but people don't need religion for these things.

    Homosexuality contributes plenty to society. It provides a buffer, even if only slightly, to overpopulation. Homosexuals are likely to only have children they actually want, certainly much more likely than heterosexuals. And homosexuals are fewer people adding to the population increase, which is a serious issue, whether some wish to recognize it as such or not. Homosexuality provides couples willing to take in children that heterosexual couples are less likely to take in because of their defects. Homosexuality provides yet another example of diversity in families and people.
    You could argue that homosexuality is a buffer against overpopulation but it's not a compelling argument. I doubt you would try to make that a legal argument because it would probably weaken your other arguments a lot more than it would strengthen them.

  5. #1165
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Last Seen
    09-18-16 @ 03:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,029

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    This is refuted by the reality that people have been known to switch teams several times. Therefore your statement cannot be a genuine fact even if you think it might be a reasonable assumption as a generality. It is still just an assumption and not a proven fact.
    That refutes nothing except the notion that sexual orientation is unitary. People are complex. Their sexuality is complex. Get used to it.

    Heterosexuality is, basically, just about having children. Hence the reason so many homosexuals refer to heterosexuals in the pejorative as "breeders". It's certainly not a "way of life". When I'm asked what I am, my sexual orientation never comes to mind as my defining characteristic. For gay people it does. And that's queer (no pun intended).
    This simplistic notion of human sexuality is another reason nobody takes conservatives seriously anymore on most major issues, like gay rights. The idea that heterosexual sexuality is "about" having children can be refuted by two words: blow job.

  6. #1166
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by rocket88 View Post
    I'm unable to have children. Does that mean I'm not a heterosexual?
    Black labs are all about hunting and swimming....even if they are never permitted to go near the water or roam the fields. That you can't or don't have children doesn't change the fact that heterosexuality is, essentially, about having children. Or to put it more scientifically, it follows and adheres to the biological imperative. That on an individual basis it may fail to achieve the biological imperative is immaterial.

  7. #1167
    Sage
    Papa bull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Midwest
    Last Seen
    06-25-15 @ 01:35 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,927

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by head of joaquin View Post
    That refutes nothing except the notion that sexual orientation is unitary. People are complex. Their sexuality is complex. Get used to it.



    This simplistic notion of human sexuality is another reason nobody takes conservatives seriously anymore on most major issues, like gay rights.
    Don't argue with me about it. Argue with Darwin.

  8. #1168
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    07-16-13 @ 12:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,568

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Don't argue with me about it. Argue with Darwin.
    As is you have read Darwin.

  9. #1169
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post
    Not as a group. The "Gay Group" can take no credit for any meaningful contribution to society that I can think of even if individuals within that group are functioning and productive members of society.
    You keep going back and forth, you say that they as a group DO contribute positively to society like other groups do.



    And that's where your argument falls off a cliff. You want to attribute any productive activity by any member of the group to the "group". As I said before, that makes any group with any productive member of society "contribute in a meaningful way" just as much as the "gay group".
    I know that, you are confirming again that they do contribute to society in a meaningful manner. That is one part of the criteria for suspect class.



    And if your argument held water in the supreme court, you'd already have what you wanted, wouldn't you? It will be difficult to prove either point - that "as a group" the 'homosexual group" contributes meaningfully to society any more than the group of "red haired people" contribute meaningfully to society or that they are discriminated against because unlike red-haired people, you can't tell someone is a homosexual except by their behavior. They don't look different. They don't have any distinguishing marks. They don't wear distinguishing symbols. They don't have any uniformity at all. So how do you argue that an indistinguishable group gets "discriminated against"?
    FFS sake this is stupid, I already told you that SC's in the US have determined that they are a suspect class.....and.... you personally have stereotyped them, singling them out as a group for discrimination. i don't know why I have to keep reminding you that you already proved my case.



    I don't know what it takes but that wasn't it.
    I know you have a strong case of denial.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  10. #1170
    Guru
    Aderleth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    04-08-16 @ 06:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,294

    Re: Awaiting the Supreme Court's gay marriage decisions [W:641]

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa bull View Post

    Heterosexuality is, basically, just about having children.
    Go to any bar in any college town in the country and ask any group of single guys if the reason they're there has anything to do with trying to produce a child.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •