• 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!

New York State Senate Votes Down Gay Marriage Bill

Navy Pride said:
If you had been around here for more then 5 minutes you would know that.........
Click to expand...

Yes...."separate but equal" is fine with you right Navy?

You just don't want "Them" drinking out of your same drinking fountain.
 
Navy Pride said:
Lets get something clear....I could care less what gays or straights do in the privacy of the bedroom.....I just don't want to know about it........I am for gays having the same rights I have......I believe that can be accomplished through Civil Unions...I don't consider getting married a right..Its a privilege.........I believe in the sanctity of marriage and want it to remain the way it is today for the reasons I have posted a 100 times in this forum.......Gays have the same option I have...they can marry someone of the opposite sex..........I don't believe gays should marry, nor polygamysts, nor anyone identified by a class or sexual preference, nor I don't believe brothers and sisters, mothers and daughters. etc should marry for the benefits even if they remain celebrant........
Click to expand...

Your spelling needs work :D

polygamysts -> polygamists

celebrant -> celibate

Now on to my post,


It is this dude's belief that you cannot be homosexual so much as partake in homosexual activity, even if it's what you do exclusively. It's a fetish. a kink. Homosexual sex is what gets your rocks off. Nothing more, nothing less and has nothing to do with what kind of Union you are entitled to. That being said, I believe same-gender unions are not based on the kind of SEX you have (you'd be shallow or stupid to get married/union'd out of lust), it's the kind of person you want to be your partner in LIFE. Same-Sex Unions should not get the word MARRIAGE (not yet, just to keep the Hetero folks happy) but they should be able to get said unions, and have the same rights and opportunities that Different-Gender marriages can get.

Problem solved, everyone go back to your homes, **** or be ****ed with whatever appendage, hole, or inanimate object that your heart desires.
 
misterman said:
I think he wants to know why you think marriage is about procreation only when we allow non-fertile heteros to marry. I sure want to know. And gays can have children too, you know.
Click to expand...

That wasn't even close to the point. Nature has made men attracted to women and women attractive to men for procreation. Heterosexuality has a rock solid basis in nature. Homosexuality does not either in nature or genetics.
 
disneydude said:
Society also made a moral judgement that people should only be able to marry members of their own race. Did you support that as well?
Click to expand...

Race and Homosexuality are not the same. You cannot compare something proven to be genetic to something that never has been.

I know its a classic fallacy of the left to pretend race and homosexuality are equal but they aren't.
 
texmaster said:
Race and Homosexuality are not the same. You cannot compare something proven to be genetic to something that never has been.

I know its a classic fallacy of the left to pretend race and homosexuality are equal but they aren't.
Click to expand...

You can't choose your race, but sometimes you can and sometimes you can't choose what gives you that tingling in your loins...

:D amirite?
 
texmaster said:
That wasn't even close to the point. Nature has made men attracted to women and women attractive to men for procreation. Heterosexuality has a rock solid basis in nature. Homosexuality does not either in nature or genetics.
Click to expand...

This is what we call an opinion, not based in fact. There is significant evidence that at least some people are created gay, and that would be nature at work.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
That's not at all what I said.
Click to expand...

Thats exactly what you said. I quote you:

Sex isn't just for the purposes of procreation. If it were, it wouldn't feel good.

You are somehow trying to split the natural pleasure of heterosexual sex away from procreation and its not going to fly.

Nor is that. Is this how you think you win arguments, by making up positions that the other person never had?
Click to expand...

I'm asking you a question. If you aren't able to clarify your general misleading comments then don't respond. Either answer the question or walk away. Your choice.

My comment was specifically aimed at people who oppose it for religious reasons. It's not my fault that you failed at reading comprehension and were unable to see that.
Click to expand...

I see you are one of these debaters that has to be reminded of their own words:

I also don't think that any religion should be able to get their anti-gay marriage ideology legislated. No single religion holds a monopoly on marriage and what the definition of it is. End of story.

End of story? The point I made to you is that religious reasons are not the only reason so no, its not "end of story"

Please go back and re-read your own posts before I have to do it for you again.

Oh and you think that the arguments against gay marriage are based in facts? :rofl
Click to expand...

Absolutely and I gave you my reasons. You weren't brave enough to address them head on. Pretty typical of someone with your lack of factual backing for your arguments.

You are trying to be obtuse in order to prove your failed point. I specifically said consenting adults. A 16 year old kid isn't a consenting adult. Please, try to stay on topic.
Click to expand...

You still aren't getting it are you? Why are you limiting it to consenting adults?

Please say because its the law... Please... :rofl

Society did no such thing. Are people who are pro-gay marriage not a part of society?
Click to expand...

Um 31-0 Thats the times gay marriage has been put out there for the people to decide and thats how many times they have said no to gay marriage.

And see since people have voted in 31 states 31 times and said no I think society has spoken.

Or are you going to now proclaim 31 voter based propositions aren't members of society?

Give it up. You lost this pages ago. If you wish to further embarrass yourself however by all means keep going.
 
EpicDude86 said:
You can't choose your race, but sometimes you can and sometimes you can't choose what gives you that tingling in your loins...

:D amirite?
Click to expand...

I see the homophobes and bigots are still at it.

Sexual orientation is a hard-wired personality trait. You can't choose it any more than you can choose if you're left-handed or right-handed.
 
Redress said:
This is what we call an opinion, not based in fact. There is significant evidence that at least some people are created gay, and that would be nature at work.
Click to expand...

There is no evidence people are created gay. To beleive that is to believe a fallacy.

There is no genetic study anywhere proving even 60% of only homosexuals (60% because I'm so generous not asking for 90 or 100% certainty) showing them to carry any genetic trait so your statement is flat out false unless you can prove otherwise.

And we know you can't.
 
hazlnut said:
I see the homophobes and bigots are still at it.

Sexual orientation is a hard-wired personality trait. You can't choose it any more than you can choose if you're left-handed or right-handed.
Click to expand...

And your factual and scientific basis is where?

I love it when you guys make these statements as if they are fact with zero backing.

BTW, bigot is someone who is intolerant of another person's viewpoint so welcome to the club. :2wave:
 
Redress said:
This is what we call an opinion, not based in fact. There is significant evidence that at least some people are created gay, and that would be nature at work.
Click to expand...

Bull****. You are not created knowing what gets you off as a 100% definite. All sorts of things from genetic makeup, experiences, and societal influences, etc. all play a role in deciding what gets you that tingling in your loins.
 
texmaster said:
Thats exactly what you said. I quote you:

Sex isn't just for the purposes of procreation. If it were, it wouldn't feel good.

You are somehow trying to split the natural pleasure of heterosexual sex away from procreation and its not going to fly.
Click to expand...

Oh, so now you are saying that pleasure can't be derived from homosexual sex? :rofl

I'm asking you a question. If you aren't able to clarify your general misleading comments then don't respond. Either answer the question or walk away. Your choice.
Click to expand...

No, you are misquoting me and then using these incorrect quotes to form arguments and I'm sorry, but that's just not going to fly. I'm more than happy to engage in an actual discussion with you, but when you use dishonest tactics like these I'm not interested. So, what is it going to be?

I see you are one of these debaters that has to be reminded of their own words:

I also don't think that any religion should be able to get their anti-gay marriage ideology legislated. No single religion holds a monopoly on marriage and what the definition of it is. End of story.

End of story? The point I made to you is that religious reasons are not the only reason so no, its not "end of story"
Click to expand...

Yes, and as I said before, I was specifically referring to people who are against gay marriage for religious reasons. I never said that that was the ONLY reason that people are against gay marriage. Obviously, that wasn't clear for you. It's not my fault you have comprehension issues.

Please go back and re-read your own posts before I have to do it for you again.
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean so you don't have to go back and misquote me some more? Come back when you actually have something legitimate to add to the discussion.

Absolutely and I gave you my reasons. You weren't brave enough to address them head on. Pretty typical of someone with your lack of factual backing for your arguments.
Click to expand...

Oh, so now your opinions are facts? :lol:

You still aren't getting it are you? Why are you limiting it to consenting adults?

Please say because its the law... Please... :rofl
Click to expand...

Um... I'm limiting it to consenting adults because adults can give consent. Kids can't. Again, please stay on topic. I'm not going to get into a semantics argument based on your obtuse views.

Um 31-0 Thats the times gay marriage has been put out there for the people to decide and thats how many times they have said no to gay marriage.
Click to expand...

So what? Do you really think it's going to stay that way? People progress over time. The amount of people who support gay marriage has increased dramatically over the last 20 years. We've come quite a long way and will continue to do so.

And see since people have voted in 31 states 31 times and said no I think society has spoken.

Or are you going to now proclaim 31 voter based propositions aren't members of society?
Click to expand...

Once again, misrepresenting what I said. What a shock!

Give it up. You lost this pages ago. If you wish to further embarrass yourself however by all means keep going.
Click to expand...

I honestly get a kick out of people like you. If you seriously want to delude yourself into thinking you somehow won by misrepresenting what I said, be my guest. :doh
 
hazlnut said:
I see the homophobes and bigots are still at it.

Sexual orientation is a hard-wired personality trait. You can't choose it any more than you can choose if you're left-handed or right-handed.
Click to expand...

Really, I guess I must be the one exception to the rule. I'm into things now that I was never into before, things that originally I was not turned on by or even turned off by, and vice versa.

EDIT: I can smell the ****storm brewing...No wait, that's my hot chocolate! brb.
 
Last edited:
texmaster said:
There is no evidence people are created gay. To beleive that is to believe a fallacy.

There is no genetic study anywhere proving even 60% of only homosexuals (60% because I'm so generous not asking for 90 or 100% certainty) showing them to carry any genetic trait so your statement is flat out false unless you can prove otherwise.

And we know you can't.
Click to expand...

Source: What causes sexual orientation? Nature or Nurture....?

Important note: This is what we call providing actual backing for our opinions

Conflicting quotations -- two from each "side:"

  • "There is no scientific data that substantiates a genetic or biologic basis for same-sex attraction. Anybody can change." Richard Cohen, at the year 2000 PFOX, (Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays) convention.
  • "Homosexuality & heterosexuality are likely to be the result of an interaction of several different factors, including genetics, hormonal & environmental factors. Psychological & social influences alone cannot cause homosexuality." PFLAG Oakland - East Bay.
  • "To date, all information and studies involving genetics have proven homosexuality to be environmental, not genetic." PFOX web site.
  • "Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. It is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different moral values and standards of a particular culture." Statement on Homosexuality, American Psychological Association, 1994-JUL.
Click to expand...

The page linked contains a wealth of information, and shows basically that it is pretty impossible to state for sure one way or the other whether homosexuality is genetic or environmental. You want us to assume that you are right and that it is strictly environmental, while offering zero evidence. If you really want to play the game, I suggest you start rounding up sources, but I promise you that I can match you source for source, and we will end up with a draw. The causes of homosexuality are not known for sure, and to state that you are right, as a fact, is pure hubris. You may be convinced you are right, but then again, I am pretty confident I am right too, that there are a number of causes of sexual orientation, and the fact there is a variety of causes is why the research is so conflicted.

By the way, the website I linked to as a whole(ReligiousTolerance.org by the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance) is an awesome website, even if you disagree with the overall concept. They offer a ton of documentation and do a fair job of presenting opposing views. Highly recommended. And, credit where credit is due, I got the link from a CaptainCourtesy post.
 
disneydude said:
Yes...."separate but equal" is fine with you right Navy?

You just don't want "Them" drinking out of your same drinking fountain.
Click to expand...

Oh come on. Navy doesn't show any kind of hatred or desire to suppress the happiness of gays. He simply believes that gay marriage is wrong.

He and I will disagree on that but never has Navy indicated that gays should be served at different lunch counters or sit at the back of the bus.
 
EpicDude86 said:
It is this dude's belief that you cannot be homosexual so much as partake in homosexual activity, even if it's what you do exclusively. It's a fetish. a kink. Homosexual sex is what gets your rocks off. Nothing more, nothing less and has nothing to do with what kind of Union you are entitled to. That being said, I believe same-gender unions are not based on the kind of SEX you have (you'd be shallow or stupid to get married/union'd out of lust), it's the kind of person you want to be your partner in LIFE. Same-Sex Unions should not get the word MARRIAGE (not yet, just to keep the Hetero folks happy) but they should be able to get said unions, and have the same rights and opportunities that Different-Gender marriages can get.

Problem solved, everyone go back to your homes, **** or be ****ed with whatever appendage, hole, or inanimate object that your heart desires.
Click to expand...

But ED, the problem won't be solved. The minute it becomes law that Marriage A is for heterosexuals and Marriage B is for homosexuals then you will have the opened the door for the same elements in our society who tried to deny Marriage B before to start challenging the rights inherited by both parties from that contract.

For instance, preferential treatment for adoption and foster care is given to married couples. So now that you have two marriages, which one gets preference over the other in adoption? Well clearly those from Marriage A category are going to press that their marriage is "a little more equal" than Marriage B because the only reason the two have different names is because of moral disapproval becoming codefied into law.

If you just give the exact same marriage to both parties, the openings for legal wrangling of one group or the other out of their rights is greatly decreased.
 
jallman said:
Oh come on. Navy doesn't show any kind of hatred or desire to suppress the happiness of gays. He simply believes that gay marriage is wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but to call AIDS as a "gay disease" as he has does demonstrate hatred at worst, ignorance at best towards gays.
 
TheNextEra said:
I'm sorry but to call AIDS as a "gay disease" as he has does demonstrate hatred at worst, ignorance at best towards gays.
Click to expand...

There was a time that the medical community called it gay related cancer. And it is much more prevalent in homosxual populations than it is in the straight populations.

He definitely isn't sugar coating anything but he isn't being dishonest in his observations either. I don't see the hatred there.
 
Redress said:
Source: What causes sexual orientation? Nature or Nurture....?

Important note: This is what we call providing actual backing for our opinions



The page linked contains a wealth of information, and shows basically that it is pretty impossible to state for sure one way or the other whether homosexuality is genetic or environmental. You want us to assume that you are right and that it is strictly environmental, while offering zero evidence. If you really want to play the game, I suggest you start rounding up sources, but I promise you that I can match you source for source, and we will end up with a draw. The causes of homosexuality are not known for sure, and to state that you are right, as a fact, is pure hubris. You may be convinced you are right, but then again, I am pretty confident I am right too, that there are a number of causes of sexual orientation, and the fact there is a variety of causes is why the research is so conflicted.

By the way, the website I linked to as a whole(ReligiousTolerance.org by the Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance) is an awesome website, even if you disagree with the overall concept. They offer a ton of documentation and do a fair job of presenting opposing views. Highly recommended. And, credit where credit is due, I got the link from a CaptainCourtesy post.
Click to expand...


You really are amusing. Nothing in any of that list of theories says homosexuality is genetic and the entire site is extremely biased and attacks only one side of people who are against gay marriage, Christianity. It doesn't address any other religion's views even though Islam is far stricter.

That is the point I was making because some people were trying to equate race to homosexuality which is a false argument since you cannot prove it is genetic. Got it now?

If you can't answer my simple challenge to you don't bother linking to theoretical arguments.
 
Last edited:
jallman said:
There was a time that the medical community called it gay related cancer.
Click to expand...

But those days are long gone.

And it is much more prevalent in homosxual populations than it is in the straight populations..
Click to expand...

Is it?

It may be more prevalent per capita. But there are likely more total HIV cases among heteros, simply because there are so many more heteros. Certainly that's true in Africa. They have millions and millions of cases, but they're not all a bunch of homos over there.
 
misterman said:
But those days are long gone.



Is it?

It may be more prevalent per capita. But there are likely more total HIV cases among heteros, simply because there are so many more heteros. Certainly that's true in Africa. They have millions and millions of cases, but they're not all a bunch of homos over there.
Click to expand...

That's irrelevant. Rate of transmission among homosexual men is far greater than any other demographic. Gay men make up a small portion of the total population but a majority of the actual cases.

Like I said, he definitely isn't sugar coating it but he isn't being totally dishonest in relating a fair perception.
 
texmaster said:
You really are amusing. Nothing in any of that list of theories says homosexuality is genetic and the entire site is extremely biased and attacks only one side of people who are against gay marriage, Christianity. It doesn't address any other religion's views even though Islam is far stricter.

That is the point I was making because some people were trying to equate race to homosexuality which is a false argument since you cannot prove it is genetic. Got it now?

If you can't answer my simple challenge to you don't bother linking to theoretical arguments.
Click to expand...

I see we're still in deny and lie mode.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom