• 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!

Texas Gay Marriage Ban Latest to Be Struck Down[W:97]

Question for all you equality warriors here:

If and when SSM is allowed in the entire US, what will be the next group of downtroddens to champion?
 
Question for all you equality warriors here:

If and when SSM is allowed in the entire US, what will be the next group of downtroddens to champion?

Christians obviously
 
Romans 1:18-32 NKJV - God

If you followed along, you would notice I said these were scripture, not my words.

Paul is not God

If you were following, you would know I don't give a crap about how a sexually uptight, bigot like Paul interpreted the work of Jesus Christ or God.
 
Question for all you equality warriors here:

If and when SSM is allowed in the entire US, what will be the next group of downtroddens to champion?

Who knows. We'll see when/if the issue comes up. Not really important right now to this debate.
 
Paul is not God

If you were following, you would know I don't give a crap about how a sexually uptight, bigot like Paul interpreted the work of Jesus Christ or God.

Take it up with the Bible. None of the Apostles (original or after Christ's resurrection) are thought to be God. They were simply messengers.
 
Who knows. We'll see when/if the issue comes up. Not really important right now to this debate.

Since some people have insinuated that accepting SSM would lead to other groups wanting equality, I thought it was a pertinent question.
 
Take it up with the Bible. None of the Apostles (original or after Christ's resurrection) are thought to be God. They were simply messengers.

No offense, but given that 99% of Christians do not seem to know the history of that book and yet treat the words from it like they were the direct words of God, I tend to roll my eyes when I hear people quote from it.
 
Question for all you equality warriors here:

If and when SSM is allowed in the entire US, what will be the next group of downtroddens to champion?

Answer: what ever group is being denied their rights as Americans. I cant think of any that are requesting anything that fits under the umbrella of unConstitutional, which courts are supporting for sexual orientation more and more. It wasnt right for women, it wasnt right for blacks, it's not right for gays.

I never saw you answer these questions, after I pointed out that the state allows all kinds of sinners to marry:

WCH said:
I don't see you fighting for my marriage or my opinion.

No one needs to fight for your marriage. You have not proven how your marriage is affected in any way, and you CHOSE to have the state recognize your marriage, no one forced you to do so. YOu could have just had a ceremony in your church and be recognized by God. Why did you choose to include the state too? How do they validate your marriage?
 
Answer: what ever group is being denied their rights as Americans. I cant think of any that are requesting anything that fits under the umbrella of unConstitutional, which courts are supporting for sexual orientation more and more. It wasnt right for women, it wasnt right for blacks, it's not right for gays.

I never saw you answer these questions, after I pointed out that the state allows all kinds of sinners to marry:

Because I didn't think comparing homosexuals to murderer (or other types of criminals) was a worthy argument.
 
With this group, I sincerely doubt it will be Christians. Beside we've overcome much worse.

But, we are oh so oppressed, we can't have what we want, then we want it!
 
Question for all you equality warriors here:

If and when SSM is allowed in the entire US, what will be the next group of downtroddens to champion?

who don't we have reasons to tread on?
 
With this group, I sincerely doubt it will be Christians. Beside we've overcome much worse.

you did have to go up against those fanatical Christians for a chunk of your history hardly have any denomination on denomination violence or oppression any more
 
Because I didn't think comparing homosexuals to murderer (or other types of criminals) was a worthy argument.

But you kept claiming that gays shouldnt be allowed the sanctity of marriage because being gay is a sin in the Bible. So is murder, fornication, adultery. And all are supposed to be weighed the same.

No one has stood up and objected...in more than 200 yrs...that those other sinners are entitled to the sanctity of marriage. Why gays?

And if the state is so evil, and extraneous to that sanctity....why did you and your wife choose to marry with a formal state marriage license and not just something through your church, completely sanctified and legitimate in the eyes of the Lord?

(2 different questions)
 
Since some people have insinuated that accepting SSM would lead to other groups wanting equality, I thought it was a pertinent question.

That is a slippery slope fallacy. IF those people have a legitimate case that they are being treated unequally, then it will have absolutely nothing to do with same sex couples currently being treated unequally. They would have different characteristics used in restrictions and different legal/state justifications for why those restrictions are in place and what (if any) state interests are furthered by those restrictions.
 
Answer: what ever group is being denied their rights as Americans. I cant think of any that are requesting anything that fits under the umbrella of unConstitutional, which courts are supporting for sexual orientation more and more. It wasnt right for women, it wasnt right for blacks, it's not right for gays.

I never saw you answer these questions, after I pointed out that the state allows all kinds of sinners to marry:

I personally think that first cousins (and any relations further out than that) have a legitimate case of being wrongfully restricted when it comes to being able to not marry. However, their argument does not change whether same sex restrictions are found to be unconstitutional or not. The arguments are completely separate on both sides.
 
But you kept claiming that gays shouldnt be allowed the sanctity of marriage because being gay is a sin in the Bible. So is murder, fornication, adultery. And all are supposed to be weighed the same.

No one has stood up and objected...in more than 200 yrs...that those other sinners are entitled to the sanctity of marriage. Why gays?

And if the state is so evil, and extraneous to that sanctity....why did you and your wife choose to marry with a formal state marriage license and not just something through your church, completely sanctified and legitimate in the eyes of the Lord?

(2 different questions)

I guess I must repeat myself one more time.

It isn't about equality [as you've been led to believe.] it's about tearing down those who would stand in their way. Mostly tradition and religion. Just like Liberals do to everyone who opposes them.


We don't have a church but, it wouldn't matter if we did. It is between us and God. [unlike Catholics, we don't need an intermediary]

In case you don't realize, you need the State license to be legally married and get all the lovely benefits therein.
 
I guess I must repeat myself one more time.

It isn't about equality [as you've been led to believe.] it's about tearing down those who would stand in their way. Mostly tradition and religion. Just like Liberals do to everyone who opposes them.


We don't have a church but, it wouldn't matter if we did. It is between us and God. [unlike Catholics, we don't need an intermediary]

In case you don't realize, you need the State license to be legally married and get all the lovely benefits therein.

nope equality that's what's its about you can keep on with your tradition and religion as much as you like the same as before you just cant bind people to it against their will to them ( though to be fair I guess that tradition is under threat )
 
I guess I must repeat myself one more time.

It isn't about equality [as you've been led to believe.] it's about tearing down those who would stand in their way. Mostly tradition and religion. Just like Liberals do to everyone who opposes them.

We don't have a church but, it wouldn't matter if we did. It is between us and God. [unlike Catholics, we don't need an intermediary]

In case you don't realize, you need the State license to be legally married and get all the lovely benefits therein.

You clearly objected earlier that gays, because of their sin, damage the sanctity of marriage. That is what I am addressing. That's why I brought up OTHER sinners and their being able to marry. That may not be about 'equality' but it is about fairness and hypocrisy. I wanted to know if you had an explanation. You avoided it.


As you introduce something else here, are you claiming that there is a 'gay agenda' to tear down Christians? Many of them ARE Christians! As are many of us that support SSM. They arent tearing down *MY* religion or traditions. They want to marry because that is what American couples in love DO. Do you have anything to support the existance or intent of some gay agenda?

And the bold is one of the things I was getting at. You dismiss the state as EVIL. And apparently meaningless when it comes to YOUR marriage. It's only before God that your marriage matters TO YOU. However...you wanted the 'lovely benefits therein.' So you choose to take advantage of that evil state that recognizes marriage for sinners and atheists and other religions.

Which(the benefits, etc) you feel should be denied gays? THAT is about *equality.* And because marriage means 'marriage' to them, that is what they want, not civil unions. (Separate but equal has been found unConstitutional)

So you just proved that it is indeed about equality.
 
Last edited:
Question for all you equality warriors here:

If and when SSM is allowed in the entire US, what will be the next group of downtroddens to champion?

It wouldn't shock me to see polygamy come up in discussion more often, but that has far lower popular support and also doesn't have the same legal argument going for it. (equal protection clause doesn't apply because number of people is not a protected classification)
 
I guess I must repeat myself one more time.

It isn't about equality [as you've been led to believe.] it's about tearing down those who would stand in their way. Mostly tradition and religion. Just like Liberals do to everyone who opposes them.


We don't have a church but, it wouldn't matter if we did. It is between us and God. [unlike Catholics, we don't need an intermediary]

In case you don't realize, you need the State license to be legally married and get all the lovely benefits therein.

Yes, you do need the State license to get the benefits. But you aren't forced to get married. You did choose that, and you can choose to end that at any time. That doesn't bother anybody. You're right, you don't need the intermediary.

So what's the problem? Does two dudes signing that same legal contract somehow make the sanctity of your marriage diminished? Does it harm your relationship with God? Does it reduce any of those legal benefits? I honestly have a really hard time understanding why it bothers you so much that two dudes would sign the same legal contract. Whether or not God approves of their union is an entirely separate discussion, not at all relevant to the state benefits.

Gay people are asking for the right to sign that contract. They are not asking for the right to your God's approval, or your approval. And they aren't harming your marriage. Please, help me understand your stance on the issue.
 
Last edited:
You clearly objected earlier that gays, because of their sin, damage the sanctity of marriage. That is what I am addressing. That's why I brought up OTHER sinners and their being able to marry. That may not be about 'equality' but it is about fairness and hypocrisy. I wanted to know if you had an explanation. You avoided it.


As you introduce something else here, are you claiming that there is a 'gay agenda' to tear down Christians? Many of them ARE Christians! As are many of us that support SSM. They arent tearing down *MY* religion or traditions. They want to marry because that is what American couples in love DO. Do you have anything to support the existance or intent of some gay agenda?

And the bold is one of the things I was getting at. You dismiss the state as EVIL. And apparently meaningless when it comes to YOUR marriage. It's only before God that your marriage matters TO YOU. However...you wanted the 'lovely benefits therein.' So you choose to take advantage of that evil state that recognizes marriage for sinners and atheists and other religions.

Which(the benefits, etc) you feel should be denied gays? THAT is about *equality.* And because marriage means 'marriage' to them, that is what they want, not civil unions. (Separate but equal has been found unConstitutional)

So you just proved that it is indeed about equality.

You know, I'm tired of this merry-go-round of questions. Let's just conclude this with I have my opinion that says not matter what the reason you give, I'm not going to support Gay marriage.

You have whatever opinion you want.
 
It wouldn't shock me to see polygamy come up in discussion more often, but that has far lower popular support and also doesn't have the same legal argument going for it. (equal protection clause doesn't apply because number of people is not a protected classification)
Pedophilia already has come up.
 
Back
Top Bottom