• 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

Deuce said:
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?
Click to expand...

Back you go on Ignore with your buddy DD. You are a hopeless case.
 
Navy Pride said:
Back you go on Ignore with your buddy DD. You are a hopeless case.
Click to expand...

You haven't given a reason that procreation is a show-stopper for same-sex marriage but not for infertile couples.

The social conservatives tend to twist and dance around that one pretty good. It's always entertaining.
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
You haven't given a reason that procreation is a show-stopper for same-sex marriage but not for infertile couples.

The social conservatives tend to twist and dance around that one pretty good. It's always entertaining.
Click to expand...

I dont understand that either. It's like when I ask the fundamentalist Christians why they forbid gays marriage because homosexuality is a sin but they dont forbid adulterers or fornicators, for example, from marrying. Never even made the attempts, while they've publicly and expensively waged war to prevent gays.
 
Navy Pride said:
Through no fault of there owninfertile couples can not procreate.....That is a very small percent of the people who marry.
Click to expand...

Which in no way matters when it comes to marriage. My father cannot procreate with anyone he currently would be in a relationship with through complete fault of his own (he had a vasectomy while married to my mother).

The percent of married couples that cannot procreate is at least at 6%, which is more than the amount of married couples that would be of the same sex even if same sex marriage were legal in every state, much more. And those that choose to not have children (either through voluntary sterilization or simply taking other measures to be childless) are even higher.

The fact is though that legally, positive procreative ability is not a requirement of marriage anywhere in the US. However, negative procreative ability is a requirement in some states in the US for certain couples.
 
roguenuke said:
Which in no way matters when it comes to marriage. My father cannot procreate with anyone he currently would be in a relationship with through complete fault of his own (he had a vasectomy while married to my mother).

The percent of married couples that cannot procreate is at least at 6%, which is more than the amount of married couples that would be of the same sex even if same sex marriage were legal in every state, much more. And those that choose to not have children (either through voluntary sterilization or simply taking other measures to be childless) are even higher.

The fact is though that legally, positive procreative ability is not a requirement of marriage anywhere in the US. However, negative procreative ability is a requirement in some states in the US for certain couples.
Click to expand...

There is a small percentage of men and women couples who cannot have children but no gays can......That is zero.
 
Navy Pride said:
There is a small percentage of men and women couples who cannot have children but no gays can......That is zero.
Click to expand...

There is a percentage of zero women who have had a hysterectomy that can have children. No uterus means no children. Statistically, about 1 in 3 women will have a hysterectomy, while they are still in their reproductive years.

Hysterectomy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yet women who have had hysterectomies are still allowed to marry. Why? Because positive ability to procreate is not a legal requirement of marriage. Your argument fails because of this fact. Until you address this fact, your argument is basically pointless. The law itself is against you, especially since there are in fact some laws that require negative procreative ability within the couple in order for the couple type (first cousins) to marry legally.

State Laws Regarding Marriages Between First Cousins
 
Deuce said:
America has a large number of conservatives who are really, really obsessed with what two dudes they've never met might be doing in their bedrooms.
Click to expand...

Sounds pretty gay of those cons doesn't it
 
CanadaJohn said:
If you believe conservatives espouse those policy positions in government, then no you didn't. An identifiable group's policy platforms are not in and of themselves a blanket description of those who identify with that group. There are many conservatives who are pro-choice as there are many liberals who are pro-life - neither of which is reflected in their party's platform, as an example.
Click to expand...

I disagree. My comments were overgeneralized blanket statements about conservatives, just as yours were about liberals.

Now, if you'd followed the discussion that Deuce and I were having and discovered that my comments were in response to our discussion about how government supports individual lives, you may have gotten that distinction. Deuce made similar comments to yours with respect to perceptions of conservatives in response. I don't challenge your perceptions, but I've never claimed all individuals of any persuasion hold the same views of the majority in that group. I only claimed that their approach to government follows a particular form which neither you nor anyone else has belied.
Click to expand...

I saw the conversation. Both of you made overgeneralizations.
 
Navy Pride said:
Try and keep up, I know its difficult for you. of course people procreate outside of marriage but gays sure as hell don't.
Click to expand...

Gays certainly do. Plenty of gays procreate. You have been told this COUNTLESS times.
 
Navy Pride said:
Just remember the silent majority as well as the SCOTUS is yet to be heard.
Click to expand...

Currently, the majority support SSM. And my guess is that SCOTUS will go the same route that it went with DOMA.
 
clownboy said:
You can't sidestep that in order to procreate outside of the laboratory homosexuals must put aside being homosexual, at least temporarily.
Click to expand...

No, they don't. There is a difference between sexual orientation and sexual behavior
 
Navy Pride said:
We are going around in circles here...........again marriage provides a much stable life style for a child...........Gays can not procreate.
Click to expand...

Procreation is irrelevant in the context of providing a stable life for a child. Evidence proves that gays do this as well as straights.
 
Navy Pride said:
There is a small percentage of men and women couples who cannot have children but no gays can......That is zero.
Click to expand...

Once again Navy Pride is dead wrong. I personally know of many gay people who have children. It doesn't take a brain surgeon....then again....it is....oh..nevermind.
 
clownboy said:
You can't sidestep that in order to procreate outside of the laboratory homosexuals must put aside being homosexual, at least temporarily.
Click to expand...
Just so you know.....you can do wonders with a turkey baster...and it doesn't involve a laboratory.
 
disneydude said:
Just so you know.....you can do wonders with a turkey baster...and it doesn't involve a laboratory.
Click to expand...

What a delightful story to tell your kids - your father was a cooking implement. Now, Happy Thanksgiving. :lamo
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, they don't. There is a difference between sexual orientation and sexual behavior
Click to expand...

And thanks, that negates the need for gay marriage and suggests that homosexuals can be made into heterosexuals. Behavior is what counts IRL.
 
clownboy said:
What a delightful story to tell your kids - your father was a cooking implement. Now, Happy Thanksgiving. :lamo
Click to expand...

And you told your kids that you took their mother on the kitchen table one afternoon?

It's hard to imagine hypocrisy more clear than what you're posting.
 
clownboy said:
And thanks, that negates the need for gay marriage and suggests that homosexuals can be made into heterosexuals. Behavior is what counts IRL.
Click to expand...

No, it means that people can act anyway they choose but that doesnt change who they are.

Prison inmates have same gender sex all the time. Doesnt make them gay.
 
clownboy said:
What a delightful story to tell your kids - your father was a cooking implement. Now, Happy Thanksgiving. :lamo
Click to expand...

Using something like a turkey Bastor is pretty common and safe
 
Lursa said:
And you told your kids that you took their mother on the kitchen table one afternoon?

It's hard to imagine hypocrisy more clear than what you're posting.
Click to expand...

Wow, got a bug up your butt? I made a humorous reply to a humorous post and it went sailing right over your head. This is how you tell you're a fanatic.
 
clownboy said:
Wow, got a bug up your butt? I made a humorous reply to a humorous post and it went sailing right over your head. This is how you tell you're a fanatic.
Click to expand...

Your reply was nasty, not humorous. And 100% hypocritical.

I calls 'em as I sees 'em. Denial works best when you go on the defensive tho...so feel free to continue.
 
tacomancer said:
Using something like a turkey Bastor is pretty common and safe
Click to expand...

C'mon, it was a tongue in cheek reply. And no, it may be common (are people really that stupid), but it's not "safe". Way to introduce soooo many problems.
 
Lursa said:
Your reply was nasty, not humorous. And 100% hypocritical.

I calls 'em as I sees 'em. Denial works best when you go on the defensive tho...so feel free to continue.
Click to expand...

Yup, pretty much the fanatical reply I was expecting. The post I replied to was tongue in cheek as was my reply. That's why the emoticon.

And anyone who is using a turkey baster to inseminate themselves doesn't care one wit for the product. Good grief, and we give the trailer park set guff for Rube Goldberg stupidity.
 
clownboy said:
What a delightful story to tell your kids - your father was a cooking implement. Now, Happy Thanksgiving. :lamo
Click to expand...
Well...I'm assuming that most parents don't tell their kids that they were engaged in wildly crazy sexual intercourse when he shot a huge load into the mother in an incredible orgazmic moment.Seriously.....where do you guy come up with this stuff. Most kids don't question and don't even really want those details.
 
disneydude said:
Well...I'm assuming that most parents don't tell their kids that they were engaged in wildly crazy sexual intercourse when he shot a huge load into the mother in an incredible orgazmic moment.Seriously.....where do you guy come up with this stuff. Most kids don't question and don't even really want those details.
Click to expand...

Okay, that let's Lursa off the hook on this one. My apologies, I took your post as humorous and replied in that vein.

Now, non-humor: The turkey baster can work, but it is medically inadvisable and a dangerous way to go about getting pregnant. Not only do you risk fatal infections but you risk damaging the sperm (and the resulting child) and/or your entire reproductive system. If you try this you are an idiot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom