• 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!

Alaska ban on same-sex marriage ruled unconstitutional

Conservative said:
Sexual orientation isn't the issue, common law on a subject not in the Constitution is
Click to expand...

What does common law say about straight marriage in the Constitution?
 
Conservative said:
Yes, we have an amendment to the Constitution on Religion. You want one on Marriage? go for it. I will support your effort
Click to expand...

Religion is protected, as is gender. That's all marriage...and state recognized 'marriage contracts' need....not allowing SSM is discriminating against one gender or the other in that contract.
 
The last time VRA was reupped it was by a vote of 97-0.
Now it can't get a vote due to GOP Sen.McFilibuster, the odds-on choice for the next Majority Leader.
Lursa said:
I wonder how many people moved out of the US to find more 'freedom'
when they finally ended segregation, ensured interracial marriage, and really dealt the death blows to Jim Crow?
(Heh, I'd guess....none).
Click to expand...
Your comment about the death blows to Jim Crow don't equate to reality in about two dozen GOP-controlled states.

You must not have noticed the SCOTUS decision to eliminate all but one section of the VRA until there is a new act,
which will never happen again--just as Civil Rights could not happen today.

The SCOTUS just threw out Wisconsin Gov. Walker's 21st Century high-tech Jim Crow law and will throw out the Texas law shortly.
You live a sheltered life politically in Washington where voter suppression isn't an issue--yet .
 
WorldWatcher said:
What's that got to do with what you said?

You said go out and get a Civil Union, I showed where your State (Texas) like mine (Virginia) doesn't allow Civil Unions. As a registered Republican since 1978 and someone that has been bad mouthed as to my conservative stances on fiscal responsibility, defense, and immigration (I'm more a Goldwater Conservative then a modern Social Authoritarian Conservative) - I voted against the Virginia amendment, how did you vote pertaining to the Texas Amendment?


A decade ago Social Authoritarians voted to enact discriminatory bans for BOTH Civil Marriage AND Civil Unions when they felt they were in a position of power and that public opinion wouldn't shift. Instead of acting to recognize that same-sex couples deserved the same rights, responsibilities, and benefits as different-sex couples and working for a compromise at that time - State level Civil Unions with equal Federal recognition - Ohhhh no. Your side fought for no recognition at all.

Your side took Civil Unions off the table and now same-sex Civil Marriage is winning in the Courts, winning in the legislatures, and winning at the ballot box. Well that came back to bite you in the ass.



>>>>
Click to expand...

My side? My company headquartered in Houston allows civil unions as well as benefits for same sex partners and this is a Houston based company so not sure exactly what you are talking about. I dealt with competitors as well who did the same thing.

I was married for over 40 years and marriage has been on the books for centuries. Don't you find it a bit disturbing that all this SSM lawsuit bs just surfaced in the 70's? Why is that? What makes this an issue now and one that by all estimates involves less than 5% of the American population? I contend it has nothing to do with pursuit of happiness but rather malcontents who are looking for and seeing attention. I have no use for these people nor for their cause especially if it isn't passed by the state electorate
 
chromium said:
Frankly someone who is not gay has 0 credibility and no place arguing that it is a choice. I'm gay and can guarantee it's not a choice. Now why should anyone accept your stance instead?

Even not being born with a sexuality, but rather it developing in early life, well before any sexual attraction sets in, would suggest choice has nothing to do with it. Researchers have been able to predict the sexuality of children as young as 4. I suppose 4 year olds choose to be gay?

This also makes no sense because claims of an adult permanently changing their sexuality, despite the pressure to do so, are way too rare. Even heroin addicts claim to kick the habit with greater success.

You clearly don't know jack all about epigenetic research either. Twin studies like in MN revealed that it must be partly genetic. The current leading theory is that hormonal influence while in the womb interacts with genes, so there is no "show me the gay gene," because it's biological but more complicated.
Click to expand...

I could give a **** what you think of me or my opinions. I don't like the way you are going about getting what you want for your own pleasure but more importantly for attention. You want gay marriage approved,, get the population to approve it not the courts. You know the outcome of your efforts and that is why people like you don't want a Constitutional Amendment put to the people. The outcome won't be what you want.

What doesn't make sense to me is the passion you have and the excuse you make about this being about pursuit of happiness. This is nothing but personal arrogance and a malcontent looking for attention. find it someplace else. The people of your state should decide the issue and that should be the case in every state.
 
prometeus said:
What part of the fact that it is not a states issue do you not understand. The peoples of various states even if mostly ignorant bigots do not get to vote on who and what rights can people enjoy or be denied. It looks like it is you who needs a remedial civics class.
Click to expand...

The fact that it isn't in the Constitution and that makes it a state issue. Civics isn't a strong suit of yours but arrogance is. Anyone that doesn't agree with you is a bigot? fortunately you constitution less than 5% of the population so I couldn't care less what you think.
 
Peter King said:
Because I have had a friend of the family who is gay, I was at school with people who happened to be gay. Also, studies kinda show that while it is possible for gay people to live as straight people, this does not make them any less gay, it just makes them choose to live against their nature. Straight men living like gay people is not very likely and the argument just misses all validity IMHO.

Also, there are at least indicators that show that gay brains may be wired a bit different than straight brains.

Homosexuality & Choice: Are Gay People 'Born This Way?'
Click to expand...

That is indeed the liberal argument yet you cannot point to the gay gene. I am still waiting. Homosexuality is a personal choice but it is easier for people like you to believe it is inherited or a born trait That is Bull****.
 
year2late said:
Are your opinions based on in depth discussions with real live gay people who told you they made a choice?
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less what some gay person has to say on the issue. I prefer science, show me the gay gene? Some people will do or say anything to justify their own behavior.
 
TheNextEra said:
Words change throughout history. Again, not a reason. Too bad you are on the losing side. Deal with THAT.
Click to expand...


I have lost nothing nor will I but you are going to lose a lot when states' rights issues are put in the hands of a bureaucrat in D.C. or some justice. You don't understand states' rights at all nor do many here.
 
Lursa said:
What does common law say about straight marriage in the Constitution?
Click to expand...

Marriage isn't in the Constitution, when it gets there then you will have an issue. This is a state issue and that is the bigger issue, states' rights. The rest of your posts are simply a rehash and deserve no responses thus you will get none
 
Conservative said:
I have lost nothing nor will I but you are going to lose a lot when states' rights issues are put in the hands of a bureaucrat in D.C. or some justice. You don't understand states' rights at all nor do many here.
Click to expand...

Funny you and other cons never spoke up when the feds were involved in marriage before. Only when SSM was an issue did you whine and cry. Yes, you and other cons lost.
 
Lursa said:
Religion is protected, as is gender. That's all marriage...and state recognized 'marriage contracts' need....not allowing SSM is discriminating against one gender or the other in that contract.
Click to expand...

Great, let's get a Constitutional Amendment like with Religion and gender. I will support your efforts and then lobby my Congressional Representative to keep marriage between a man and a woman.
 
TheNextEra said:
Funny you and other cons never spoke up when the feds were involved in marriage before. Only when SSM was an issue did you whine and cry. Yes, you and other cons lost.
Click to expand...


I lost nothing but you are losing a states' right issue. Good luck with that massive central govt. and their court system that you seem to not understand
 
Conservative said:
WorldWatcher said:
What's that got to do with what you said?

You said go out and get a Civil Union, I showed where your State (Texas) like mine (Virginia) doesn't allow Civil Unions. As a registered Republican since 1978 and someone that has been bad mouthed as to my conservative stances on fiscal responsibility, defense, and immigration (I'm more a Goldwater Conservative then a modern Social Authoritarian Conservative) - I voted against the Virginia amendment, how did you vote pertaining to the Texas Amendment?


A decade ago Social Authoritarians voted to enact discriminatory bans for BOTH Civil Marriage AND Civil Unions when they felt they were in a position of power and that public opinion wouldn't shift. Instead of acting to recognize that same-sex couples deserved the same rights, responsibilities, and benefits as different-sex couples and working for a compromise at that time - State level Civil Unions with equal Federal recognition - Ohhhh no. Your side fought for no recognition at all.

Your side took Civil Unions off the table and now same-sex Civil Marriage is winning in the Courts, winning in the legislatures, and winning at the ballot box. Well that came back to bite you in the ass.



>>>>
Click to expand...
My side? My company headquartered in Houston allows civil unions as well as benefits for same sex partners and this is a Houston based company so not sure exactly what you are talking about. I dealt with competitors as well who did the same thing.
Click to expand...


Didn't ask what your company did. I clearly stated how I voted on the Virginia amendment, I asked how you voted on the Texas amendment. Did you or did you not vote a decade ago to not even allow for Civil Unions in your state?


Multiple times you have said to posters (and I paraphrase) - "go out and get a Civil Unions". But yet it was Social Authoritarians that took Civil Unions off the table when they thought they had the upper hand.



>>>>
 
Conservative said:
I couldn't care less what some gay person has to say on the issue. I prefer science, show me the gay gene? Some people will do or say anything to justify their own behavior.
Click to expand...

So you think mot gay people are just lying about being "born gay"?:shock:
 
Conservative said:
I lost nothing but you are losing a states' right issue. Good luck with that massive central govt. and their court system that you seem to not understand
Click to expand...

Good luck with your hypocrisy when you said NOTHING when the feds were involved before. Blame yourself. You've lost, SSM will be a reality despite what YOU want it to be.
 
Wondering how our right-wing friends will react to the Pope's latest bombshell destigtmatizing gays, divorce and folks living together.
$i$ter $arah may have to reevaluate the Pope as she did last time.
The con-federates may go back to hating on Catholics as they did in the 1920's with the KKK .

beefheart said:
View attachment 67174423
Click to expand...
 
Conservative said:
I couldn't care less what some gay person has to say on the issue. I prefer science, show me the gay gene? Some people will do or say anything to justify their own behavior.
Click to expand...

Lursa said:
Why do you assume that it is genetic? Have you no better knowlege of reproduction and outcomes? Really?

Many things affect the unborn in the womb....things like the environment, stress, anger, fear...causing the mother to release hormones that, at certain times during gestation, can affect the unborn. Is this a new concept for you?
Click to expand...
..........
 
NIMBY said:
Wondering how our right-wing friends will react to the Pope's latest bombshell destigtmatizing gays, divorce and folks living together.
$i$ter $arah may have to reevaluate the Pope as she did last time.
The con-federates may go back to hating on Catholics as they did in the 1920's with the KKK .
Click to expand...


OMG, teh ghayz has rights, theyze humans!!!

There will be small vestiges of these dogmatic bigots...took a while with the ones against interracial marriage...

Sometimes you just have to wait for a generation of fools to die out.
 
No--we just had to wait for a gift On High--as I believe.
There are so many Catholics, especially the Bishops, who want to speak out on a myriad of issues.
We finally have the Pope beyond all our dreams.
There are still plenty of connie Bishops that need to go--like mine but I won't say where he's from out of respect.

I love the Sisters and how they have devoted their lives.
The Sisters control about a dozen hospitals in my area--public hospitals have assimilated with them for survival.

My wife and I have had a few Sisters who said mass--
with the bread and wine blessed of course--
since we were out in the boondocks with no Priests.

Those days will be coming to an end--Long Live the Pope .

beefheart said:
OMG, teh ghayz has rights, theyze humans!!!

There will be small vestiges of these dogmatic bigots...took a while with the ones against interracial marriage...

Sometimes you just have to wait for a generation of fools to die out.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
NIMBY said:
No--we just had to wait for a gift On High--as I believe.
There are so many Catholics, especially the Bishops, who want to speak out on a myriad of issues.
They finally have the Pope beyond all our dreams.
There are still plenty of connie Bishops that need to go--like mine but I won't say where he's from out of respect.

I love the Sisters and how they have devoted their lives.

My wife and I have had a few Sisters who said mass--
with the bread and wine blessed of course--
since we were out in the boondocks with no Priests.

Those days will be coming to an end--Long Live the Pope .
Click to expand...

Back in the days when I was Catholic (K-12), we had a bishop that was a pedophile that never got charged, and the next one covered up all the pedophiles by moving them from parish to parish (we had 2 of them), and then, one night, while driving drunk, he hit and killed a homeless man, and drove off, locked his car in the garage. Did he go to jail? Nope, he eventually resigned, but still has free housing and living in freedom. Freaking hypocrites.
 
I understand man--unfortunately, too many of us have similar types of horror stories.
I come and go to Church--but my Wife has the eternal Faith of Our Fathers and inspires me to be the best person I can be.

There's no question in my mind that both of us were gifted with special qualities as Teachers.
This is why I constantly spoke of the Creator in my Chem/Physics classroom--since it is used in our Constitution.

As for me, I believe I'll find out the rest of the story when I die.
Kind of the old John Lennon tapestry of our brains being interconnected by electrical impulses.
I also have no doubt this is how our great geniuses like da Vinci and Einstein were communicated with in some way .

beefheart said:
Back in the days when I was Catholic (K-12), we had a bishop that was a pedophile that never got charged, and the next one covered up all the pedophiles by moving them from parish to parish (we had 2 of them), and then, one night, while driving drunk, he hit and killed a homeless man, and drove off, locked his car in the garage. Did he go to jail? Nope, he eventually resigned, but still has free housing and living in freedom. Freaking hypocrites.
Click to expand...
 
Conservative said:
That is indeed the liberal argument yet you cannot point to the gay gene. I am still waiting. Homosexuality is a personal choice but it is easier for people like you to believe it is inherited or a born trait That is Bull****.
Click to expand...

Yes, why admit that gays are born that way when you can blame them for making the choice to be gay. Homosexuality is not a personal choice, living against your gay self as a straight man is a personal choice, being gay is not.
 
Conservative said:
Let me know when you figure out what states' rights are and how the courts are destroying the foundation upon which this country was built. You don't seem to get it or understand. If your state votes for SSM so be it, great. If my state votes for SSM no problem. It is a state issue. What part of that don't you understand?
Click to expand...

Let me know when you figure out individual rights and the right to Equal Protection of the law.

It is not a state issue when the law does not treat people equally. That makes it a constitutional issue.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom