• 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!

Maine voters repeal gay-marriage law

Scorpion89 said:
See you still don't get it at all like I said just stop you have no idea about the subject and quite frankly I'm tired of trying to explain it to you.
Click to expand...

Don't explain. It is plain obvious that your constitution means nothing when it stands in a way of greedy plans of those in power. That was the case then, that is the case now.
 
Scorpion89 said:
Hmm so your saying that Kateryna Yushchenko was a gift from the US State Dept to Viktor Yusgchenko who was born in Khoruzhivka and the last time I looked that was still part of the Ukraine not part of France.

It had nothing to do with the fact they meet fell in love and decide to get married right :doh
Click to expand...

You can take Victor out of Khoruzhivka...

As for his wife, it's not me, it's Victor's best (now former) buddies are saying that Katerina was a gift and a condition for Victor to becom president, and that she runs the show...

Btw, back in 2004 there were reports that his first wife and her uncle (who were threatening his rise to power) were assasinated.
 
Elena said:
Don't explain. It is plain obvious that your constitution means nothing when it stands in a way of greedy plans of those in power. That was the case then, that is the case now.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't nor does it now look you don't know **** about the subject and now your trying to throw something into it that has nothing ot do with. If the USA is so ****ing bad then why does nearly 1/3 or your Countries population want to move to the USA and please explain to me why States like Maine/Maryland/Virgina/Arizona/Mass have a very large Ukrainian population that have moved here since the fall of thw Wall huh. Give it a rest just admit you don't know anything about the US or our Const. nor Jack 1 about the US Civil War. now run along and have a nice cup of borsh.
 
Elena said:
You can take Victor out of Khoruzhivka...

As for his wife, it's not me, it's Victor's best (now former) buddies are saying that Katerina was a gift and a condition for Victor to becom president, and that she runs the show...

Btw, back in 2004 there were reports that his first wife and her uncle (who were threatening his rise to power) were assasinated.
Click to expand...

Yea and the KGB along with the MI6 are behind the Kennedy assination to :shock::doh:roll:

Do you actually believe the **** you type just asking :2wave:
 
disneydude said:
What are the responsibilities that you are speaking of that are incumbent to the privilege of marriage?
Click to expand...

Procreation and bringing up a solid member of the society for startes.
 
Elena said:
Procreation and bringing up a solid member of the society for startes.
Click to expand...

So I take it you are fine then restricting marriage to fertile couples and requiring people to sign a contract of procreation as a condition to marriage?
 
Scorpion89 said:
Yea and the KGB along with the MI6 are behind the Kennedy assination to :shock::doh:roll:

Do you actually believe the **** you type just asking :2wave:
Click to expand...

Since neither Yuschenko nor his friends and former allies make no secret of the assistance the US gives them, why shouldn't I believe them? I am sure Yuschenko knows who sponsor him!
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Law ain't going to force anyone's church to perform ceremonies for anyone they don't want to. And the law ain't stopping any churches from performing all manner of non-legally binding marriage ceremonies for whoever they want to.
Click to expand...


The problem with your statement is that there is a significant minority who think that IS going to happen if gay marriage does pass. AND there is a LOUD radical fringe on the Left that DOES want to force churches to alter doctrine and to require marriage to all comers.
 
Shadow Serious said:
The problem with your statement is that there is a significant minority who think that IS going to happen if gay marriage does pass. AND there is a LOUD radical fringe on the Left that DOES want to force churches to alter doctrine and to require marriage to all comers.
Click to expand...

That was the entire focus of the lies and deceit that the mormon church ran in favor of prop 8 in california.
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
So I take it you are fine then restricting marriage to fertile couples and requiring people to sign a contract of procreation as a condition to marriage?
Click to expand...

No. Because they may or may not be fertile and if they adopt, they still will be capable to bring up a balanced individual, while gay couples are incapble of it by definition.

And before you will come up with "adoption", the very person who first thought up to give kids to gay couples should be sectioned.

"My mother who is also my father who is a man, but was a woman gave birth to me" -- what that can do to a child's psychological development?

But of course, it's your society, if you as a society decide to turn yourselves into a collection of psychologically damaged individuals with no idea of a family where mental health is guarded by balanced input from male and female psyche, -- it's your choice, your funeral...
 
Last edited:
Elena said:
No. Because they may or may not be fertile, while gay couples are incapble of it by definition.

And before you will come up with "adoption", the very person who first thought up to give kids to gay couples should be sectioned.

"My mother who is also my father who is a man, but was a woman gave birth to me" -- what that can do to a child's psychological development?

But of course, it's your society, if you as a society decide to turn yourselves into a collection of psychologically damaged individuals with no idea of a family where mental health is guarded by balanced input from male and female psyche, -- it's your choice, your funeral...
Click to expand...


Well that's just silly and completely exposes the flaws in your rationale.
If you base your justification on that rationale...at least be consistent.
 
Phoenix said:
Plenty of PRIVILEGES are granted by the marriage license.
Click to expand...

What "PRIVILEGES" do married people get that non-married people cannot get through civil contract?

What "PRIVILEGES" do married people get that are unconstitutional for non-married people not to get?
 
disneydude said:
Well that's just silly and completely exposes the flaws in your rationale.
If you base your justification on that rationale...at least be consistent.
Click to expand...

Really? And numerous studies in UK are showing the crucial importance of both male and female -- father and mother -- input into a healthy development of a child.

I guess, they are wrong. Political correctness rules!
 
Elena said:
No. Because they may or may not be fertile and if they adopt, they still will be capable to bring up a balanced individual, while gay couples are incapble of it by definition.
Click to expand...
The data shows that gay couples are just as capable of raising children as straight couples despite the inability to procreate themselves.

Elena said:
"My mother who is also my father who is a man, but was a woman gave birth to me" -- what that can do to a child's psychological development?
Click to expand...
Why don't you tell us doctor???

Elena said:
But of course, it's your society, if you as a society decide to turn yourselves into a collection of psychologically damaged individuals with no idea of a family where mental health is guarded by balanced input from male and female psyche, -- it's your choice, your funeral...
Click to expand...

This statement solidifies your unadulterated ignorance and bias. Its why anything you claim on this matter can now be summarily dismissed without substantial evidence. Congratulations.
 
scourge99 said:
The data shows that gay couples are just as capable of raising children as straight couples despite the inability to procreate themselves.
Click to expand...

Believe it if you want.
 
scourge99 said:
This statement solidifies your unadulterated ignorance and bias. ...Congratulations.
Click to expand...

This statement solidifies your unadulterated ignorance and blunt devotion to politically correct dogmas. Congrats.
 
Elena said:
Believe it if you want.
Click to expand...

What do you have to offer? Opinion without proof. Opinion without facts. Opinion soaked in nothing but bias and contempt.

Why should anyone believe ANYTHING you say on the matter when you are willing to lie, misrepresent, and exaggerate?
 
scourge99 said:
What do you have to offer? Blah!
Click to expand...

What did YOU offer so far? Politically correct slogans and personal attacks?

If you really wanted to find out about the damage same-sex couples and single parent upbringing does to the psychological development of a child, you would've found the information. But you don't want to. Be happy in your ignorance, I am not your mother to care.
 
Elena said:
Use your imagination, patient.
Click to expand...
I agree that your opinion is derived from nothing but your imagination. That is painfully obvious to me and everyone viewing this thread. Otherwise you would produce some EVIDENCE that supports your position that children of homosexual couples are "psychologically imbalanced".

Surely if your bald faced assertions were true there should be something, ANYTHING, you could point to in order for us to validate your claims?

Is it a conspiracy? Is all the information being hidden?

Elena said:
This statement solidifies your unadulterated ignorance and blunt devotion to politically correct dogmas. Congrats.
Click to expand...

Please quote or show where I claim that my support of gay marriage has anything to do with "political correctness".

Otherwise retract your claim.
 
Elena said:
What did YOU offer so far? Politically correct slogans and personal attacks?
Click to expand...
Very well.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/41174-do-you-object-gay-couples-adopting-3.html#post1057847882

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/41174-do-you-object-gay-couples-adopting-3.html#post1057847883

Elena said:
If you really wanted to find out about the damage same-sex couples and single parent upbringing does to the psychological development of a child, you would've found the information. But you don't want to. Be happy in your ignorance, I am not your mother to care.
Click to expand...

Please show me this evidence that has convinced you. Do you have anything? Anything at all?

What convinced you?
 
Last edited:
Elena said:
If you really wanted to find out about the damage same-sex couples and single parent upbringing does to the psychological development of a child, you would've found the information. But you don't want to. Be happy in your ignorance, I am not your mother to care.
Click to expand...

What do single parents upbringing children have to do with same sex couples upbringing children?

I think I've posted this before...

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/118/1/349

Somewhere along the line did you see "fatherless" statistics taken from children of single mothers and get it mixed up in your head that a single parent home could somehow translate over to a two parent same sex couple home?
 
Last edited:
Elena said:
Really? And numerous studies in UK are showing the crucial importance of both male and female -- father and mother -- input into a healthy development of a child.

I guess, they are wrong. Political correctness rules!
Click to expand...

Its not about PC its about making a logical argument without flaws. You failed miserably in supporting your argument. Sorry.
 
Yup, same-sex couples can raise children just fine...as can related couples and underage siblings.
 
scourge99 said:
What "PRIVILEGES" do married people get that non-married people cannot get through civil contract?

What "PRIVILEGES" do married people get that are unconstitutional for non-married people not to get?
Click to expand...

Most of the privledges that married folks get comes from the federal government. Just how exactly is a single person going to get those benefits through a civil contract?

joint parenting
joint adoption
joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents)
status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent
joint insurance policies for home, auto and health
dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support
immigration and residency for partners from other countries
inheritance automatically in the absence of a will
joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment
inheritance of jointly-owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate)
benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare
spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home
veterans' discounts on medical care, education, and home loans
joint filing of tax returns
joint filing of customs claims when traveling
wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children
bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child
decision-making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her
crime victims' recovery benefits
loss of consortium tort benefits
domestic violence protection orders
judicial protections and evidentiary immunity
and more....

There are around 1,100 priviledges granted by the federal government to those that are married.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom