• 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!

Appeals court upholds decision overturning Virginia’s same-sex marriage ban

Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

poweRob said:
scalia doesn't believe in precedence so he tends to rule however he may feel from one day to the next.
Click to expand...

his vote will be irrelevant just as it was in windsor
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Mr.Nick said:
Or maybe the US can just stop recognizing marriages altogether and let the sacrament of religion adhere to religion?
Click to expand...

I actually agree with you there. However, we BOTH know NEITHER side is going to concede marriage from the government. That's a fact. Therefore the only course of action for gays is to obtain that same right as they have been.

There are religions that accept SSM so more power to them. I would love to see the government out of marriage, but it isn't going to happen. If I could ever vote on it I would vote to get government OUT of marriage altogether.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

TheNextEra said:
Well then stop fighting it since there are more pressing matters. The ****ing GOP is the one with anti-SSM in their PLATFORM. So maybe you should tell them to stop fighting it and move on to more pressing matters ok?

Oh wait, that is because the GOP makes it a big ****ing deal each election instead of worry about other things. SSM is going to be legal it is inevitable so why do they waste time fighting it?
Click to expand...

Yeah, well. I would care less about who has sex with who, whowrer economics and geo-politics is by far a more complicated socioeconomic issue than gay marriage, And I would truly would love to talk about that over social issues - even on a global level or geographic level - here in the United State (where I thinking several of our economic ideas here in the sates have epic flaws when it government to regional standard of living.

If you would like to start a thread on geo/regional economics even considering those in the sates I would love to debate.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Mr.Nick said:
Yeah, well. I would care less about who has sex with who,
Click to expand...

You don't care if I had sex with you?

It's a brave new world out there.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Mr.Nick said:
Yeah, well. I would care less about who has sex with who, whowrer economics and geo-politics is by far a more complicated socioeconomic issue than gay marriage, And I would truly would love to talk about that over social issues - even on a global level or geographic level - here in the United State (where I thinking several of our economic ideas here in the sates have epic flaws when it government to regional standard of living.

If you would like to start a thread on geo/regional economics even considering those in the sates I would love to debate.
Click to expand...

I agree with you there. However, short of government getting out of marriage (which we know they won't do) the legalization of SSM is inevitable so the GOP should stop fighting it so more pressing matter can be fixed.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Jack Fabulous said:
Again... what facts are you talking about?
Click to expand...

fact that it is about equal rights, civil uninons are not equal to marriage both facts that destroy your posts lol

let us know when you have somethign factual that you can defend, we'll be waiting
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Papa bull said:
My argument is that society needn't be forced to endorse homosexuality. Period. women on women, men on men... neither is something society should be forced to endorse against their will.
Click to expand...

No one has been forced, you're just living in 1950s so you don't realize that most now simply disagree with you.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

TheNextEra said:
I actually agree with you there. However, we BOTH know NEITHER side is going to concede marriage from the government. That's a fact. Therefore the only course of action for gays is to obtain that same right as they have been.

There are religions that accept SSM so more power to them. I would love to see the government out of marriage, but it isn't going to happen. If I could ever vote on it I would vote to get government OUT of marriage altogether.
Click to expand...

I have never had a problem with homosexuals - However I have had it with homosexual flaunting their homosexuality unnecessary in publican in an attempt to make public spectacle out of it to mainstream and perhaps attempt to "normalize it" when in reality - even those that support homosexual marriage can be extremely uncomfortable around homosexuals when they get "affectionate" in public places.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Mr.Nick said:
I have never had a problem with homosexuals - However I have had it with homosexual flaunting their homosexuality unnecessary in publican in an attempt to make public spectacle out of it to mainstream and perhaps attempt to "normalize it" when in reality - even those that support homosexual marriage can be extremely uncomfortable around homosexuals when they get "affectionate" in public places.
Click to expand...

Homosexuality is normal in the sense that despite there being a same sex partner they live their lives like anyone else. Yes, there are those that are flamboyant, however, the majority are not.

Now I understand YOUR religion may not condone it, however to that I say don't involve yourself with a homosexual partner and you'll be fine.

Gays are not going to go away and if people would stop making such a big deal out of SSM, I would bet a weeks salary that the flamboyancy would decrease exponentially.

BTW This is the most civil conversation I've had with you regarding the subject. I like it that way and would like to keep it going in that direction. I tip my hat off to you there sir.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Papa bull said:
Why do lesbians need to be taken into consideration. It's homosexuality. I've known some lesbians but having a homosexual brother has made the male homosexual a lot easier to get to understand.
Click to expand...

So since you keep bringing it up, does your brother know you hate him so, or is DP your dumping ground to avoid saying anything repulsive in front of him?
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Mr.Nick said:
1.)Or maybe the US can just stop recognizing marriages altogether
2.) and let the sacrament of religion adhere to religion?
3.)That's the only FAIR way to tackle such social issue
4.) considering Mariiage is NOT a civil right and it has NEVER been a civil right in any civilization that I'm familiar with.
5.) Governments have ALWAYS been at the forefront of this marriage debacle..... When the general consensus of popular votes have done it the democratic way the measure ALWAYS FAILS....
6.)Of course a libertarian would always come up with such a sane and FAIR outcome for all.
7.)Unions are by your church - not by a bunch of suits in the Beltway/NE/etc.. arguing existing nonsense bonding are or should be illegal on speculation.
8.)That sort of wording was NEVER in the Constitution NOR was it ever in the Bill of Rights....
9.) My opinions on the subject don't mater
10.) - what does are the words of our founding father
11.) and how twisted and vague Constitution Amendments can twisted into anything they want and can ant can be .......

The Federal and State goverments have played a much larger role in the gay and lesbian community than local communities have in the past.

12.) Now we can't use these vague words in the Constitution to validate homosexual marriage when those said words can validate juts about anything ...

13.) Besides in this day in age in 2014 it maybe abnormal to in gauge in a homosexual relationship, but at the same time hardly illegal.

14.) My only concern is that those relationships are not taken too far in public as an act of defiance.

15.)Yes as a libertarian a my political affiliation - I certain do not agree with their lifestyle -- however I am far as from accepting it just as long as they don't bother more.
Click to expand...

1.) can never happen government protects rights/contracts
2.) this is already the case, government has nothign to do with religious marriage and vice versa
3.) factually false as reality proves. Equal rights is the only way
4.) your familiarity with facts isnt needed marriage is a right
5.) also factually false and government needs to protect the contract
6.) LMAO please do not speak for all libertarians, many totally support equal rights/SSM
7.) churches are meanignless to this discussion they hold no barring what so ever
8.) the wording is already present to protect these rights see the MANY court cases (spare us the mentally retarded failed strawman about activist judges, nobody educated and honest takes it seriously)
9.) 100% correct
10.) yes they do
11.) this is only your opinion and its one you have never been able to logically or factually support, nobody honest buys it

12.) good thing they dont validate it they only protect the contract and again the second part is your unsupportable meanignless opinion

13.) meanignless opinion that doesnt matter to ER/SSM

14.) meaningless concern and meanignless to ER/SSM
15.) more meanignless banter that has nothing to do with ER/SSM
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Mr.Nick said:
I have never had a problem with homosexuals - However I have had it with homosexual flaunting their homosexuality unnecessary in publican in an attempt to make public spectacle out of it to mainstream and perhaps attempt to "normalize it" when in reality - even those that support homosexual marriage can be extremely uncomfortable around homosexuals when they get "affectionate" in public places.
Click to expand...

im uncomfortable around people i find ugly (straight or gay) being affectionate or flaunting thier opinion of thier sexuality/sexiness in public


whats that have to do with equal rights and SSM again?

oh thats right nothing lol
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Jack Fabulous said:
I never said anything about a formal offer being extended federally. My only comment on the matter was that the CONCEPT of civil unions was rejected by the gay community. It was. If you're trying to say that it wasn't then maybe you could point me to some of the gay rights groups who supported it?

Look, you and a couple of others here took issue with me stating that gay marriage was rooted in the desire for moral equivalency. I don't find anything profound or controversial at all about that statement. I even acknowledged that IF I were gay I'd probably be seeking the same thing. So what is the bid deal about saying it out loud? Am I wrong? Do gay couples really not give a **** about it?
Click to expand...

What exactly is the point of civil unions for gays? It creates a new bureaucracy...bigger govt. Arent conservatives against that?

If it offers all the same things...why? "Marriage" means exactly the same thing to gays as it does to straight couples...what is a concrete reason to deny them this and create a whole new structure? Or is it just the same structure with a different label? Do you see how silly that sounds? It's 'just a label?'
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Mr.Nick said:
Everybody know (well anyone that is politically informed knows) that the president can either be disposed of or impeached via high crimes and misdemeanors...(high crimes such as Murder or Treason) and mistomenors such as perjury , theft or even a DUI.... Now do you think Obama would EVER take the stand in any case? - the most ironic thing is that IF Obama was impeached he would play "dumb president" and his defense would be that his administration was anarchistic and tyrannical and made their own decisions on their own volition and Obama had nothing to do with any of that.... Of course the evidence that proves he was behind it would either be lost or extremely blacked out - like most "top secret" documents are that have been filed and released by the US government via the FOIA....

If Obama was impeached with substantial evidence -this would be the trial of the next 500 yeas.

Obama is certainly one of the most spiteful and damaging presidents in US history against US citizens and our economy, and I believe a strong pseudo-case an be made with that, however the patriot act certainly puts a damper on how much information a special prosecutor could obtain due to that fact alone.

Furthermore Obama is an evil man on a mission - he is not stupid enough to take the trial in an alleged impeachment via cross examination.

Once Obama is a civilian he will end up with the blago treatment.......

My sense tell me as a civilian he will be indicted on well over 500-750 charges because they directly connect NOT to international law but to US law.

What is good for the Goose is Good For the Gander.
Click to expand...

?????
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

..
poweRob said:
You don't care if I had sex with you?

It's a brave new world out there.
Click to expand...

well that is a very subjective term for you-- not for me considering I'm not gay or bi-sexual.

Why do you feel I should feel the same way?

This isn't Rome you know?
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

TheNextEra said:
I agree with you there. However, short of government getting out of marriage (which we know they won't do) the legalization of SSM is inevitable so the GOP should stop fighting it so more pressing matter can be fixed.
Click to expand...

What you're looking for is a mob mentality - that has nothing to do with your morals but rather what the mod tells you do do (the PC mob).
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

TheNextEra said:
Homosexuality is normal in the sense that despite there being a same sex partner they live their lives like anyone else. Yes, there are those that are flamboyant, however, the majority are not.

Now I understand YOUR religion may not condone it, however to that I say don't involve yourself with a homosexual partner and you'll be fine.

Gays are not going to go away and if people would stop making such a big deal out of SSM, I would bet a weeks salary that the flamboyancy would decrease exponentially.

BTW This is the most civil conversation I've had with you regarding the subject. I like it that way and would like to keep it going in that direction. I tip my hat off to you there sir.
Click to expand...

I suppose biologically speaking homosexuality is conduet to the "hate the human spices crowd and the special interest crowed and has nothing to do with "homosexuality" has a lifestyle but rather a means to insert some sort or radial "social justice" that is demanded to be accepted by the mainstream of society.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

TheNextEra said:
I agree with you there. However, short of government getting out of marriage (which we know they won't do) the legalization of SSM is inevitable so the GOP should stop fighting it so more pressing matter can be fixed.
Click to expand...

Ha, The GOP? well, I'm certainly not a member of the GOP and had falling out with their establishment about a decade go..
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Lursa said:
One more state challenge has been denied. Virginia is the next in the ever-shortening list of states where gays may not marry.

Appeals court upholds decision overturning Virginia

"A federal appeals court on Monday struck down Virginia’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, saying that withholding the fundamental right to marry from gay couples is a new form of “segregation” that the Constitution cannot abide.

The 2-to-1 decision by a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, based in Richmond, upheld a lower court’s decision and extended an extraordinary winning streak in the federal courts for proponents of same-sex marriage.

"Legal challenges to state bans filed systematically nationwide have prevailed in every test since the Supreme Court in June 2013 struck down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as only between a man and a woman."

Two federal appeals courts have now said the bans are unconstitutional. The Supreme Court probably will have to make the final determination and could consider the issue as soon as next year."


IMO, state governors and legislators should stop wasting their taxpayer money on challenging SSM....the handwriting has been on the wall for some time now.

Where is Agent J? I need him to post an updated list :)
Click to expand...
Welcome to the 50% divorce rate, enjoy your child support :)
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Deuce said:
Over and over and over again the courts tell us that mere moral disapproval isn't enough to uphold these kinds of laws. You'd think this would be obvious. You'd think the party of "small government" and "personal liberty" would agree with this principle. You'd think that party would say what they say about other issues of freedom "I don't approve of what you're doing but I'd die for your right to do it."

But they don't.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...




The GOP will continue to be on the wrong (Losing.)side of many issues in the USA until, about 30 years or so from now, it is reduced to a minor, regional party when massive demographic change hits it full force.

Not my problem. But I have warned them many times.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of time GOP.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Papa bull said:
I think you don't know what you're talking about. In both Rome and Greece, homosexuality was rampant. Of course the Bible talks of Sodom and Gomorrah which were so vile that even angels were molested but I don't suppose you'd be wanting to hear about that or believing it. I'll just tell you for a fact that homosexuals do recruit as much as possible. My brother is a homosexual and I've lived in homosexual communities for years during different periods of my life both in New Orleans and Atlanta's Midtown. I know what I'm talking about and recruitment is one of the biggest, if not THE biggest dirty little secret of the homosexual community.
Click to expand...

Homosexuality in Sodom or Gomorrah is a myth, not supported by anything other than the moronic belief that attempted rape as an exhibition of power over male visitors is an indicator of sexuality. It isn't.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Papa bull said:
What's relevant is that moral decay and decadence does spread and eat up a society. I gave you examples of civilizations eaten up with it.

Why do you think it has to be any different than when straight men chase women in order to satisfy you that it is a regular practice among a large segment of homosexuals? Homosexuals have been trying to seduce straight men probably forever and it's absurd to pretend that doesn't happen all the time. Like I said, the real crux of this whole "marriage equivalency" crusade is purely for the sake of normalizing homosexuality (moral equivalency) in order to facilitate recruitment of potential sexual partners.

You don't have to believe it and it'll never matter in the long run because what's going to happen will happen whether you or anyone else can face the ugly truth about it or not. Suffice to say homosexuals will never be thronging to get married. Only in those rare situations when it will actually be a tax benefit for a couple will that happen. It just makes no sense for them and most homosexuals I've known have always thought marriage was a really stupid idea for any but "breeders".
Click to expand...

Morality is subjective so you can't really prove "moral decay" (or decadence), only moral change in a majority and differences in morality.

You gave examples of civilizations that fell due to their own greed and power struggles (politically speaking) and apathy, along with a couple that were destroyed by a natural disaster in the area (not exactly something that can be prevented by having "perfect morality" even if there were such a thing).
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Papa bull said:
If the legal contract is marriage I fully expect gender distinctions to be made since marriage isn't "a couple of something". It is one of the male and one of the female joined together. It's not two male fittings awkwardly taped together to try to complete a circuit. Or two female fittings with some sort of adapter to make them work in a way they weren't supposed to.
Click to expand...

This is just plain wrong. It is a "couple of something". It is a couple of people joined together in a relationship. Legally, it is a document that is used to establish legal kinship, that of "spouses". No one should or does check the "equipment" of two people getting married to make sure they "fit right" because that has absolutely nothing to do with marriage, not legally.
 
Re: Virginia falls! Courts deny ban on SSM

Papa bull said:
That's silly. Governed absolutely can define marriage as the male and female union that nature and our government intended. Besides. No one was ever barred from marriage based on their own sex.
Click to expand...

They are barred from marrying a person of a certain sex based on their sex, just as when interracial marriage bans were in place, people were barred from marrying a person of a certain race based on their race.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom