• 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 laws against gay marriage in Michigan, 3 other states

roguenuke said:
I dare you or anyone else to try it. Because it won't happen anywhere in the near future. Heck, you couldn't even get enough support in Congress about 10 years ago, when most Congressmen actually did support banning same sex couples from marriage and DOMA was still law of the land.
Click to expand...

I suggest a popular vote and Congress will follow suit. Sort of like executive order in reverse.
 
roguenuke said:
Almost 10 years ago, that vote was taken. Now, it would be lucky to pass. In many states, those bans would be gone if it were put to a vote right now.
Click to expand...

That's the propaganda being put forward. I suspect it's bogus.

Therefore I'm confidant America would vote against total legalization.
 
Deuce said:
Ahh, so if I think heterosexuals kissing in public is disgusting, I can ban heterosexuals from marriage? That's quite the logic of yours.



Thank you for proving my point. You are the poster boy for authoritarianism. There was never any principle here. To you, individual freedom only exists for people to behave as you demand they behave.
Click to expand...

I've seen far more than 'kissing' in public. IMO, any overt physical act should be reserved for privacy, no matter the sexual orientation.

God is the only true authority
 
Deuce said:
Yes. Exactly. Nothing except "I want it that way."

Proving my point yet again. Freedom, to you, only means the freedom to do what WCH says is ok.

It is absolutely comical that you people keep crowing about individual liberty when you are its worst enemy. The absolute antithesis of individual freedom is "I don't like that, therefore it will be illegal."
Click to expand...

When you achieve personal responsibility then you can gain personal freedom. Practicing and pushing deviant behavior is not responsible act. IMO
 
No matter what anyone decides about Gay marriage, it won't stop the self-loathing, over-compensating, low self-esteem minds of those who will do anything, including dividing and destroying this country, to gain acceptance of their deviant abnormality.

Only God can help that.
 
WCH said:
I suggest a popular vote and Congress will follow suit. Sort of like executive order in reverse.
Click to expand...

No. Because popular votes change from one day to the next. There is no reason to run a country that way and that is not how our country was ever meant to be run, under popular vote for a law. It is in fact against the Constitution which specifies that laws come from the representatives, not direct votes.
 
WCH said:
That's the propaganda being put forward. I suspect it's bogus.

Therefore I'm confidant America would vote against total legalization.
Click to expand...

And your suspicions are absolutely meaningless. Reality is that the majority, especially of young people, are for allowing same sex couples to marry. Just because you live in a state of denial doesn't mean the rest of us do.
 
Navy Pride said:
If you people on the left don't want the people voting on the issues then we should completely do away with voting on anything......
Click to expand...

Are you ok with your marriage being put to a popular vote NP?
 
WCH said:
I've seen far more than 'kissing' in public. IMO, any overt physical act should be reserved for privacy, no matter the sexual orientation.

God is the only true authority
Click to expand...

Your God has no authority over me at all, not while I'm here on Earth. When I die, if it turns out you were right (which I highly doubt), then I will deal with the consequences of that. In reality though, you are trusting the words of men long dead, not God.
 
roguenuke said:
No. Because popular votes change from one day to the next. There is no reason to run a country that way and that is not how our country was ever meant to be run, under popular vote for a law. It is in fact against the Constitution which specifies that laws come from the representatives, not direct votes.
Click to expand...

Very few of our 'representative' share our views any longer so, it's time for a change.
 
roguenuke said:
And your suspicions are absolutely meaningless. Reality is that the majority, especially of young people, are for allowing same sex couples to marry. Just because you live in a state of denial doesn't mean the rest of us do.
Click to expand...
You have no way of proving that to be factual. [relying on the opinions of mush-minds is never a good idea]
 
roguenuke said:
Your God has no authority over me at all, not while I'm here on Earth. When I die, if it turns out you were right (which I highly doubt), then I will deal with the consequences of that. In reality though, you are trusting the words of men long dead, not God.
Click to expand...

Color me surprised.
 
roguenuke said:
Which is not the same thing that was put out earlier, that said they were discharged because their illnesses were no longer considered mental illnesses, but rather the people didn't care or didn't have the money to deal with them, just like I said in the beginning. It had to do with a lack of money, not a change in the philosophy of dealing with mental illness.
Click to expand...
It supports what I said earlier about most of those being released having serious mental health issues, and refutes your claim to the contrary that many were women who simply refused to do housework or insisted on wearing pants.
 
roguenuke said:
And yet the SCOTUS went far beyond just deciding to overturn the ruling that put the Lovings in jail, including requiring the state of Virginia, and all other states that had bans on interracial marriage at that time, to recognize all interracial marriages. The SCOTUS did not have to make such a broad ruling, except they could since the laws that did not recognize the Lovings as married due to their races, regardless of whether they were treated as criminals or not, violated the US Constitution.
Click to expand...
How do you envision they could have ruled that would have had a much more narrow impact? The 14th amendment only applies to the Lovings?
 
WCH said:
I've seen far more than 'kissing' in public. IMO, any overt physical act should be reserved for privacy, no matter the sexual orientation.

God is the only true authority
Click to expand...

WCH said:
When you achieve personal responsibility then you can gain personal freedom. Practicing and pushing deviant behavior is not responsible act. IMO
Click to expand...

The party of freedom, people! Freedom is earned, and even then only the freedom to do as I demand!
 
WCH said:
That's the propaganda being put forward. I suspect it's bogus.

Therefore I'm confidant America would vote against total legalization.
Click to expand...

Marriage equality won every single ballot measure in 2012. The GOP abandoned efforts towards its 2014 ballots.
 
WCH said:
That means very little.
Click to expand...


So it means little that a decade ago that bans on SSCM passed with 23-76% margins of victory, that in 2008/2009 Prop 8 and Question 1 (California and Maine respectively) squeaked by where only a 2.5% change in the vote would have changed the outcome, and that in 2012 4-ballot initiatives appeared on the General election ballots and the pro-Marriage Equality side won in each case...

Those facts mean very little.


>>>>
 
WorldWatcher said:
So it means little that a decade ago that bans on SSCM passed with 23-76% margins of victory, that in 2008/2009 Prop 8 and Question 1 (California and Maine respectively) squeaked by where only a 2.5% change in the vote would have changed the outcome, and that in 2012 4-ballot initiatives appeared on the General election ballots and the pro-Marriage Equality side won in each case...

Those facts mean very little.


>>>>
Click to expand...

That actually means quite a lot. Marriage laws are a state's right issue and if people want to change them, their legislature should address that. If the current trend continues, all states will eventually sanction homosexual marriages. And I'm satisfied with each state doing that when the will of the people in the state dictates it be done.
 
Taylor said:
How do you envision they could have ruled that would have had a much more narrow impact? The 14th amendment only applies to the Lovings?
Click to expand...

They could have ruled as many antissm here claim, only towards interracial couples. They could have said (in far more words) that the Lovings and other interracial couples had a right to be together as a couple, live together, but not be recognized as legally married. After all that is what ssm opponents claim same sex couples don't have a right to, legal recognition.
 
WCH said:
You have no way of proving that to be factual. [relying on the opinions of mush-minds is never a good idea]
Click to expand...

You have no proof to the contrary.

Oh and the most intelligent people support ssm in huge percentages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom