• 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!

Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win[W:48]

Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

1.)Ok....but if what I say is laughably untrue than please tell me why now?
2.)If this is such a significant civil rights issue why wait for public support to come out in favor?
3.) Why wasn't this issue addressed when Democrats had the house and senate and presidency just a few short uears ago? Did they just become aware that this issue existed? Why not do the right thing for the sake of doing the right thing when they became aware?
4.)You can voice your fake righteous indignation all you want, but the rest of is see this political stunt as the disingenuous ploy that it is.

1.) people finally started fighting for it and more and more people are educating themselves
why woman's rights when they happen?
why minority rights when it happened?
why interracial marriage when it happen.
2.) again see 1 some of those wen the same way LMAO
3.) what do democrats have to do with this? millions of republicans support equal rights too lol this is exactly the type of dishonest hyperbolic nonsense sense that makes nobody educated take that post seriously. also see 1 again
4.) who is us???? lmao

if you think your statement is true simply post any facts that support that retarded, mentally inept "post". heck post ONE fact that proves its not a civil/equal rights issue and its just or mainly a push by liberal democrats to distract from the President's failed economic, health care and foreign policies.

dont forget to do so youll have to probe have to prove all the court cases wrong that say its a equal rights/ civil rights issue, youl have to prove no republicans want equal rights then youll have to prove this will factually some how make people who think the president has failed economic, health care and foreign policies not matter.

we cant wait to read it, like i said nobody honest, educated and objective will ever take that dishonest rhetoric seriously. If that was an OP it would have been flushed. dont forget those facts but i bet youll post a lot of of meanignless opinions, deflections and not one single fact that actually proves then nonsense you posted lie you posted.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

Of course. It isn't bigotry if you think it is ok. [/Sarcasm]

No, hating a race, like the KKK does is bigotry. Even if you think it's ok to hate a race.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

People can be bigots all day long, there's no way to control what goes on in someone's head and people, like it or not, have a right to free speech. Bigots simply cannot act on their bigotry in legally-restricted means, they can't stop black people from eating in their establishment, they can't stop Jews from coming into their stores, etc. Nothing says they can't hate blacks or Jews though. We don't have mind-crimes in this country. People can hate gays all they want, there's no way to stop them, they just can't act on their hatred of gays.

Have I said anything different than that?
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

Have I said anything different than that?

You said:

No law protects equal access for bigots.

Absolutely it does. Free speech works just as well for bigots than for anyone else. Equality operates for everyone, even the people you disagree with.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

You said:



Absolutely it does. Free speech works just as well for bigots than for anyone else. Equality operates for everyone, even the people you disagree with.

No, that's free speech.

Look, when you at sentences in isolation, sometimes you can think some one believes something they don't. This was a response to I have to have the KKK as my key note speaker. That's nonsense.

And no, discrimination is allowed outside protected groups. A college can give preference to legacy, for example, and not violate any equal rights fir no legacy. Though both sides can say anything they want about it, absent libel and the like.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

Depends.

God didn't say a man will marry a woman. Not a man tgat believes in me will marry a woman tgat believes in me.

BUT if they marry after an invalid divorce or some other way violate God's will, then I would say I don't view it as a valid marriage. That is their business though and no one with beliefs like mine should be required to participate or validate or recognize such marriages as such. That is why the government should be out of the marriage business all together.

You don't have to participate or validate marriages that you don't approve of now. You may have to recognize them, if you happen to work for the government or in a position where you are in charge of distributing benefits where marriage might be the factor. However, that is part of living in society. And it could happen even if the government was completely out of the marriage business that a person somewhere might have to recognize that someone else was a legal spouse of another person because legal spousal recognition of some kind is always going to be necessary so long as other legal kinships are recognized.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

Of course. It isn't bigotry if you think it is ok. [/Sarcasm]

"Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice."

You want to discriminate against gays for being gay, I'm going to call you out on it. You want to discriminate against Jews for being Jewish, I'm going to call you out on it. You want to discriminate against Arabs for being Arab, I'm going to call you out on it. Because that's my first amendment right. Actively working against someone else's personal liberty based solely on your personal disapproval is about as un-American as it gets.
 
Last edited:
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

You said:



Absolutely it does. Free speech works just as well for bigots than for anyone else. Equality operates for everyone, even the people you disagree with.

No, it really doesn't. Bigots don't have a right to speak on my radio station.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

No, it really doesn't. Bigots don't have a right to speak on my radio station.

No, they don't. But they have the right to speak on their own radio station.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

"Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice."

You want to discriminate against gays for being gay, I'm going to call you out on it. You want to discriminate against Jews for being Jewish, I'm going to call you out on it. You want to discriminate against Arabs for being Arab, I'm going to call you out on it. Because that's my first amendment right. Actively working against someone else's personal liberty based solely on your personal disapproval is about as un-American as it gets.

So long as you don't solicit government force.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

No, they don't. But they have the right to speak on their own radio station.


Yes, they do.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

No, they don't. But they have the right to speak on their own radio station.

Of course.... and who was arguing otherwise?
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

So long as you don't solicit government force.

Which nobody is doing. Gay marriage being legal does not force anything upon anybody.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

National, legalized ss marriage is inevitable.

Me?

I think marriage is silly. Being legally pressured to stay with one person for the rest of your life, imo, causes more misery then joy.

A relationship is not stronger because you are married...it's just more difficult to get out of.

And people should be free (and, in fact, encouraged) to leave any romantic relationship the second they want to.

I don't want to be with the wrong person AND the last thing I want is my partner staying with me mostly because it's too much work to leave.


Having said that...any two sane, consenting adults should be able to legally marry.

I agree with what you said and in fact, it mirrors what I think. I didn't marry my husband because I *could* marry him legally. I did it because I love him. A relationship's legality isn't what makes a relationship stronger. Marriage IMO makes relationships harder because as you point out, it's very hard to get out of a marriage.

I would for myself change your last line to:

any sane, consenting adults should be able to legally marry

I don't even think it should be limited to two. Polygamists should enjoy the same rights as other adults. It isn't my business that there is more than one woman in the marriage.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

I agree with what you said and in fact, it mirrors what I think. I didn't marry my husband because I *could* marry him legally. I did it because I love him. A relationship's legality isn't what makes a relationship stronger. Marriage IMO makes relationships harder because as you point out, it's very hard to get out of a marriage.

I would for myself change your last line to:

any sane, consenting adults should be able to legally marry

I don't even think it should be limited to two. Polygamists should enjoy the same rights as other adults. It isn't my business that there is more than one woman in the marriage.

I agree with all that.

Frankly, if I want to marry a very attractive table lamp...that should be my option.

Btw, her name is Maggie and she lights up my life.

;)
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

I agree with all that.

Frankly, if I want to marry a very attractive table lamp...that should be my option.

Btw, her name is Maggie and she lights up my life.

;)

Oh man, thanks. Now I can't get that stupid song out of my head.;)

"Marriage" can be defined however you choose. We hear phrases like "He's married to his job" and things like that all the time. Obviously a man can't be legally hitched to his job but the point of using the word "married" makes the intent of the comment known.

It's easy to get married. What you do with it from there is what's difficult.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

Oh man, thanks. Now I can't get that stupid song out of my head.;)

"Marriage" can be defined however you choose. We hear phrases like "He's married to his job" and things like that all the time. Obviously a man can't be legally hitched to his job but the point of using the word "married" makes the intent of the comment known.

It's easy to get married. What you do with it from there is what's difficult.

I was not even thinking of that song...now it's in my head...thanks.

;)
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

I agree with all that.

Frankly, if I want to marry a very attractive table lamp...that should be my option.

Btw, her name is Maggie and she lights up my life.

;)

Oh great, another one of those "objects are people too" types.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

I agree with all that.

Frankly, if I want to marry a very attractive table lamp...that should be my option.

Btw, her name is Maggie and she lights up my life.

;)

It is an option for personal marriages. It isn't for legal marriage because it requires to people providing signatures. Marriage serves a legal purpose. And that purpose is not to show the world that you have feelings for someone/something. It is to establish a legal relationship so that the two people are better able to deal with issues that come up during their lives together and to make financial/legal/medical situations easier.

I am all for establishing some form of marriage that works for multiple spouses, that has more paperwork and/or less legal abilities (no one should be allowed to have 20, 50, 100, 10000 spouses granted citizenship/green cards/legal residence just due to their marriage, that would be way too hard on our economy).
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

Oh great, another one of those "objects are people too" types.

It's called a joke...you did see the winking smilie face?

Jeez people...lighten up.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

It's called a joke...you did see the winking smilie face?

Jeez people...lighten up.

I'm shaking my head. Methinks some people are way too jumpy.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

Which nobody is doing. Gay marriage being legal does not force anything upon anybody.

OK. But that statement was made more towards your intollereance of the intolerant. You're free to "call them out" all you want so long as you don't solicit government force.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

>

Plea to stop Oregon same-sex marriages : SCOTUSblog


The National Organization of Marriage (NOM) has asked the court to allow them to defined Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage since the government entities have decided that the discriminatory practice is unconstitutional and will not be defending the measure.

Given that the SCOTUS ruled that 3rd party intervenes do not have standing to defend such laws (see Hollingsworth v. Perry, 2013) what are the chances of them succeeding?



>>>>
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

>

Plea to stop Oregon same-sex marriages : SCOTUSblog


The National Organization of Marriage (NOM) has asked the court to allow them to defined Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage since the government entities have decided that the discriminatory practice is unconstitutional and will not be defending the measure.

Given that the SCOTUS ruled that 3rd party intervenes do not have standing to defend such laws (see Hollingsworth v. Perry, 2013) what are the chances of them succeeding?



>>>>

I'd say extremely small given that the situation is basically the same thing that we saw in regards to Prop 8, and the ruling there was only made last year.
 
Re: Oregon Ruling Marks 13th Straight Gay Marriage Win

>

Plea to stop Oregon same-sex marriages : SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court says...... NO!

Gay marriage: Supreme Court declines to halt same-sex marriages in Oregon | OregonLive.com

The National Organization of Marriage (NOM) has asked the court to allow them to defined Oregon's ban on same-sex marriage since the government entities have decided that the discriminatory practice is unconstitutional and will not be defending the measure.

Given that the SCOTUS ruled that 3rd party intervenes do not have standing to defend such laws (see Hollingsworth v. Perry, 2013) what are the chances of them succeeding?



>>>>

Well the Supreme Court says NO!
Gay marriage: Supreme Court declines to halt same-sex marriages in Oregon | OregonLive.com
 
Back
Top Bottom