• 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 Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

OK CC but I will never understand why Liberals are ashamed at being addressed as such.........I don't call all that just the ones that claim to be moderate or independent and in every thread they spout left wing rhetoric.......For instant I try not ot call DD that because he is one and is proud of it.........

It's more about folks like Blackdog. He's NOT a liberal... I've seen him post a lot and is not left-wing. I don't care if you call me "your left-wing friend"... I lean left and I am your friend. But Blackdog doesn't want you to, so for him, don't. :)
 
Actually no, because he had an original mother and father. It was still in the natural order of things. He knew his biological father. It would only work if one of his 2 daddies died, then he wouldn't be looked at so troubling. The school authorities would merely assume that his mother had passed away.

In bold. Appeal to tradition or Appeal to nature logical fallacy. Doesn't fly... sorry. But here, try this one:

Here's the dilemma, bicycleman. Suppose little Johnny gets into trouble at school and gets expelled. The Principal sends a note home to his parents. Johnny is instructed that if he wants to get back to school, he must have both his mother and father come to school to explain why he should be readmitted to the school. That puts poor little Johnny in a quandary because his mother was artificially inseminated and he never knew his father. Whatever will he do, now?

Oh, and you never addressed this part:

Do you realize how absolutely ridiculous your example sounds? This is NOT how it occurs. A parent or guardian would be required to do this, not both. Your example is foolish and not part of reality.
 
Last edited:
It's more about folks like Blackdog. He's NOT a liberal... I've seen him post a lot and is not left-wing. I don't care if you call me "your left-wing friend"... I lean left and I am your friend. But Blackdog doesn't want you to, so for him, don't. :)

I hate to say this but this is a personal conversation btwn u 2. Id like to suggest you guys take it to PMs
 
It's more about folks like Blackdog. He's NOT a liberal... I've seen him post a lot and is not left-wing. I don't care if you call me "your left-wing friend"... I lean left and I am your friend. But Blackdog doesn't want you to, so for him, don't. :)

OK but every post I have seen Black Dog post has been very liberal, especially in the area of gay marriage he is about as far left as you can get......I will do as you say though.........
 
I hate to say this but this is a personal conversation btwn u 2. Id like to suggest you guys take it to PMs

Eh, it was brought up here and it DOES happen at times. Issue's over, though.
 
Not so. Any answer that we give to one another, benefits the whole.

He meant the whole "left wing friend" thing. Issue's done, anyway. Let's move on.
 
In bold. Appeal to tradition or Appeal to nature logical fallacy. Doesn't fly... sorry. But here, try this one:

Here's the dilemma, bicycleman. Suppose little Johnny gets into trouble at school and gets expelled. The Principal sends a note home to his parents. Johnny is instructed that if he wants to get back to school, he must have both his mother and father come to school to explain why he should be readmitted to the school. That puts poor little Johnny in a quandary because his mother was artificially inseminated and he never knew his father. Whatever will he do, now?

Still not a problem because it equates to the fact that his dad may have been killed in the war, thus causing him to grow up without a father.


Oh, and you never addressed this part:

Do you realize how absolutely ridiculous your example sounds? This is NOT how it occurs. A parent or guardian would be required to do this, not both. Your example is foolish and not part of reality.

If my point is ridiculous, then why do you bother coming here with a counter argument? :confused:
 
OK CC but I will never understand why Liberals are ashamed at being addressed as such.........I don't call all that just the ones that claim to be moderate or independent and in every thread they spout left wing rhetoric.......For instant I try not ot call DD that because he is one and is proud of it.........

The problem is you think anyone who disagrees with you is a "left winger." I am a Moderate conservative. I tend to be a little more socially liberal because the Constitution protects the minority against the tyranny of the majority.

Just from this thread here is the criteria you set for being conservative...

We must treat all Arabs as terrorists, Muslim or not.
Freedom of Religion is only for Christians, because we are a Christan nation.
Gays are perverts because anal sex is disgusting.
More government is OK for security against the brown skinned folk.

This is like some caricature of white people from the 30's and 40's. Just replace Arab with Japanese.

Seriously.
 
Still not a problem because it equates to the fact that his dad may have been killed in the war, thus causing him to grow up without a father.

No it doesn't. It could be some random sperm from a sperm bank. Similar to if a female gay couple had a child, one which one of the women had been artificially inseminated. Absolutely no difference.

If my point is ridiculous, then why do you bother coming here with a counter argument? :confused:

To point out the ridiculousness of the argument. I consider it a public service for those who want accurate information.

But you also did not address the issue that a school would NEVER do this. They would request a guardian. They would have on file who the guardian is. You are creating a non-real situation to fit an illogical agenda. THAT is my point.
 
If so, why is the Constitution based on these Biblical truths?

The Constitution is not based on biblical truths. It is based on reason dating back farther than the bible. Even back to Babylon.

I am a Christian and you are taking it WAY out of context.
 
If so, why is the Constitution based on these Biblical truths?

Based on doesn't mean "follows to the letter" which is what you are insinuating. The bible is NOT the Constitution. That is why God's Law is NOT the law of the land.
 
Based on doesn't mean "follows to the letter" which is what you are insinuating. The bible is NOT the Constitution. That is why God's Law is NOT the law of the land.

It goes much farther than that. Gods law is for our personal lives, not a government like Muslim law can be.
 
The problem is you think anyone who disagrees with you is a "left winger." I am a Moderate conservative. I tend to be a little more socially liberal because the Constitution protects the minority against the tyranny of the majority.

Just from this thread here is the criteria you set for being conservative...

We must treat all Arabs as terrorists, Muslim or not.
Freedom of Religion is only for Christians, because we are a Christan nation.
Gays are perverts because anal sex is disgusting.
More government is OK for security against the brown skinned folk.

This is like some caricature of white people from the 30's and 40's. Just replace Arab with Japanese.

Seriously.

I don't know what your point is but all your examples are garbage......I told CC that I would not call you a lefty anymore and I will keep that promise but you and I know what your political views are are.........

That will be my last word on the subject.......Lts please talk about the great thing that happened in NJ........
 
No it doesn't. It could be some random sperm from a sperm bank. Similar to if a female gay couple had a child, one which one of the women had been artificially inseminated. Absolutely no difference.



To point out the ridiculousness of the argument. I consider it a public service for those who want accurate information.

But you also did not address the issue that a school would NEVER do this. They would request a guardian. They would have on file who the guardian is. You are creating a non-real situation to fit an illogical agenda. THAT is my point.

Okay, let me go back to that point. Schools in my day would send letters home to the parent or "guardian". You are correct. I will concede to that, but notice it says parent or guardian, not guardians. I grew up after WW2, and as a result, there were many children without fathers. There was still no letter for "guardians." It said parent or guardian. Either the mother or a family member if both parents were deceased.
 
It goes much farther than that. Gods law is for our personal lives, not a government like Muslim law can be.

I wonder if you have ever read the Declaration of Independence........
 
I wonder if you have ever read the Declaration of Independence........

To bad the Constitution, is what gives us our laws and not the DOI. :roll:

I suppose next you want to try and say the articles of confederation are somehow relevant???:lol:
 
Okay, let me go back to that point. Schools in my day would send letters home to the parent or "guardian". You are correct. I will concede to that, but notice it says parent or guardian, not guardians. I grew up after WW2, and as a result, there were many children without fathers. There was still no letter for "guardians." It said parent or guardian. Either the mother or a family member if both parents were deceased.

OK... so you're agreeing with me. I'm not sure if there is another point you are trying to make here.
 
Gods law are weaved into the fabric of this country and to say otherwise is ludicrous........
 
Gods law are weaved into the fabric of this country and to say otherwise is ludicrous........

But they are NOT THE law of the land, NP. That is why the bible holds zero authority in legal terms.
 
OK... so you're agreeing with me. I'm not sure if there is another point you are trying to make here.

I am only agreeing with you regarding the term, "guardian." Back then and even now, guardian doesn't mean 2 daddies or 2 mommies.
 
Gods law are weaved into the fabric of this country and to say otherwise is ludicrous........

And there is that "God" again. :mrgreen:

It's funny how that always comes up from the anti same sex marriage folks.
 
To bad the Constitution, is what gives us our laws and not the DOI. :roll:

I suppose next you want to try and say the articles of confederation are somehow relevant???:lol:

No but I say the Declaration of Independence is..........
 
Gods law are weaved into the fabric of this country and to say otherwise is ludicrous........

According to whom? Certainly not Jesus. He never got involved with Roman polotics, ever. There is a reason for that.
 
Back
Top Bottom