• 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!

Indiana won't recognize same-sex marriages


four very blue states..no surprise here.
 

Did you read the thread title? Are any of those states Indiana?

And, as I said, a very small handful of states.
 
#1 I'm not left wing, I've been a member of the GOP since 1978.

#2 So, you want to use a left wing tactic - instead of dealing with reality - let's "cook" the numbers to meet an objective. In this case you want to show that 50% or so marriages don't end, by throwing out a demographic of those whose marriages end. Not an honest tactic.



>>>>

I just calls em as I sees em and I said why the divorce rate was so high...........you really need to read my posts before you put your foot in your mouth.
 
You decided to 'tell me' that it's a 'two way street.' For some odd reason, since that is ***exactly what I wrote.***

And then proceeded to backpeddle for pages. Ego: not doing you any favors.

Now you are making up stuff to try and divert from the actual simplicity of my initial post? Dont go adding more to it than was intended just to bolster yourself.

Keep going, your original post is there for all to see. And no, it is not EXACTLY what you posted. In fact my response to the last two paragraphs is the exact same. Look in the mirror and read that to yourself.
 
We are going around in circles here...........again marriage provides a much stable life style for a child...........Gays can not procreate.

@_@

Gays can marry

Gays can procreate.

Gay families have not been found to be anymore or less dysfunctional than straight families.

THese are all facts. What planet are you living on?
 
Keep going, your original post is there for all to see. And no, it is not EXACTLY what you posted. In fact my response to the last two paragraphs is the exact same. Look in the mirror and read that to yourself.

So we've gone full circle. It was really simple. I just wrote it out for you again Mr Two Way Street.

But here's the original, for clarity (for others, it's obviously not ever going to be clear for you):

And most people dont care. We dont care if you agree. Think whatever you want, just dont expect other people to have to conform to what you agree or disagree with.

Your disagreement effects the marriages of gay couples as much as gay marriage affects straight marriages. Get it?

I love when other people allow ego to overrule common sense....esp. when it's in black and white on the Internetz. Keep going then...and keep my signature, in green below, in mind.

But you are not adding anything further to the conversation so please do or stop bothering me. Now you are all about me and not the topic.
 
Last edited:
We are going around in circles here...........again marriage provides a much stable life style for a child...........Gays can not procreate.

Neither can infertile hetero couples. What's your point?

I'm betting if anyone bothered to challenge it the governor's decision would go the way of the dodo bird pretty quickly. Staying an order DOES NOT retroactively invalidate what was done before the stay was issued.
 
Did you read the thread title? Are any of those states Indiana?

And, as I said, a very small handful of states.


The Post I responded to did say "this decision", so you were correct. I had interpreted it incorrectly.



>>>>
 
I just calls em as I sees em and I said why the divorce rate was so high...........you really need to read my posts before you put your foot in your mouth.


Sorry NP, you are the one putting you foot in your mouth. Discounting marriage ending, which is what the statisic is about, just to reduce the number to include only a sub-set of demographics isn't an honest technique.



>>>>
 
So we've gone full circle. It was really simple. I just wrote it out for you again Mr Two Way Street.

But here's the original, for clarity (for others, it's obviously not ever going to be clear for you):



I love when other people allow ego to overrule common sense....esp. when it's in black and white on the Internetz. Keep going then...and keep my signature, in green below, in mind.

But you are not adding anything further to the conversation so please do or stop bothering me. Now you are all about me and not the topic.

Heh, yeah, stamp your foot and declare victory, that always works. :lamo

The point is, your disagreement with the opinions of others doesn't invalidate their views any more than when the shoe is on the other foot.
 
Heh, yeah, stamp your foot and declare victory, that always works. :lamo

The point is, your disagreement with the opinions of others doesn't invalidate their views any more than when the shoe is on the other foot.

That was the point of my initial post. The exact point.

:doh Yowzaa
 
@_@

Gays can marry

Gays can procreate.

Gay families have not been found to be anymore or less dysfunctional than straight families.

THese are all facts. What planet are you living on?

Explain to me how 2 gay males can procreate.
 
Sorry NP, you are the one putting you foot in your mouth. Discounting marriage ending, which is what the statisic is about, just to reduce the number to include only a sub-set of demographics isn't an honest technique.




>>>>


You must have been a RINO when you were a Republican
 
Just remember the silent majority as well as the SCOTUS is yet to be heard.


As Scalia said in his vitriolic dissent "The writing is on the wall for this Supreme Court".

BTW...Navy Pride is still reading papers from the last decade if he believes that the majority is against marriage equality. There is a clear and growing majority of people in this country who recognize and support marriage equality.
 
Neither can infertile hetero couples. What's your point?

I'm betting if anyone bothered to challenge it the governor's decision would go the way of the dodo bird pretty quickly. Staying an order DOES NOT retroactively invalidate what was done before the stay was issued.

Smoke and mirrors, you are stating the obvious.
 
You must have been a RINO when you were a Republican


Actually Republican's believe in smaller less intrusive government and more individual liberty, at least we did until social conservatives gained influence in the party in the 80's (influence that has been on the decline).

I'm more a Goldwater Republican than a big government social authoritarian Republican. You seem to be the later.



>>>>
 
Explain to me how 2 gay males can procreate.

How is that relevant when that is not a requirement for straight marriage? We just went over this.

They have sex with women, they use IVF, surrogates, whatever. Exactly the same as straight couples also do.

Are you denying that there are gay families with the biological children of those parents? It doesnt have to be both...they're called 'step-children' just like in straight marriages. No different.
 
Smoke and mirrors, you are stating the obvious.

You sir are the one who stated that Gays cannot procreate and made that an objection to them marrying. If you don't hold the same position for infertile hetero couples your objection is what is smoke and mirrors here.
 
We are going around in circles here...........again marriage provides a much stable life style for a child...........Gays can not procreate.

It doesn't matter that gays cannot procreate with each other. Pro-creation is not a requirement for marriage. With SSM legal, straight people can STILL marry and procreate. Deal with it.
 
You sir are the one who stated that Gays cannot procreate and made that an objection to them marrying. If you don't hold the same position for infertile hetero couples your objection is what is smoke and mirrors here.

Through no fault of there owninfertile couples can not procreate.....That is a very small percent of the people who marry.
 
Smoke and mirrors, you are stating the obvious.

If gays being unable to procreate is a reason they shouldn't be allowed to sign a marriage contract, then surely this applies to infertile couples as well. Aren't you too old to have kids now? Can't procreate, so get divorced, right?
 
Through no fault of there owninfertile couples can not procreate.....That is a very small percent of the people who marry.

Irrelevant. Can't procreate, can't marry. It's your argument, dude.
 
Through no fault of there owninfertile couples can not procreate.....That is a very small percent of the people who marry.

Doesn't matter, if anything the fact that there aren't many makes for better argument since fewer people are harmed.

Can't procreate can't be married by your logic.
 
Back
Top Bottom