• 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!

After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overturn

Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

His main view is that gay marriage will not be allowed to happen. He is willing to (as a politician) disobey the law if gay marriage is legalized and not recognize them through some form of civil disobedience. The man wants to impose his views and morals upon everyone. Essentially "my view is that gays can't marry, and they won't marry and you will just have to like it!" Is this bigoted?

My view on whether something is bigoted or not depends on the person's motivation or reasoning. So, I cannot answer the question due to a lack of useful information.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

It is not inequality. We have the equal right to marry the opposite gender of what we are.

.

So the genders are not equal. Other wise a woman could do what I can do, marry a woman.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

why is it not logical for me to stand up for what I believe? Likewise by your logic, it would be illogical for you to impose your beliefs on marriage on the populace of a secular society. With our secular society we may vote based on our beliefs.
My beliefs are not imposed on anyone. Yours are.

It is not inequality. We have the equal right to marry the opposite gender of what we are.
You can marry a woman, I cannot. Inequality.


And that's en example of why we should vote and voice our beliefs. Just like with my belief on abortion, I am trying to change the laws because I don't view them as morally acceptable and right. We've debated that topic much, and I know it's your belief that abortion should remain legal. My point with bringing that up, is that just because something is currently instated doesn't mean it's wrong. However, we always have the right to challenge and try to change what we believe is wrong. If you believe marriage defined as a union between one man and one woman is wrong, then it's your right to stand up for those beliefs and legally try to make your beliefs law. Likewise, it is equally right for me to voice my beliefs and try to keep things law if I believe they are right and to change other things that I believe are wrong. That's the beauty of living in a democratic society.
Sure, you can voice your beliefs. No one is saying you can't. I'm all for freedom of speech, even if I personally find said speech abhorrent.

However, using the law to promote inequality and discrimination is a different matter.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

Yeah, you do. Evidence has been presented that proves you wrong. If you want to demonstrate that your position is anything other than pointless blathering, it is up to you to present alternate evidence. Thus far, you have presented bupkis.

Evidence and proof in your mind only. Perhaps you should pick up a dictionary and look up the world "debate."

Your beliefs are irrelevant when it comes to legalities. You have no right to not be offended. Too bad.

Wrong.

These are legal issues, not beliefs. You fail again.

Legal issues based on ethics and morals. Really you are just wasting my time now.

You can say that until you're blue in the face. It is still invalid. Evidence on the pro-GM side has been presented. The only thing you have presented is "I don't like it and I don't want it". That is why your posts have demonstrated a laick of logic or evidence. You have presented nothing, as is typical with the anti-GM crowd.

You can keep attacking my position but it won't help yours any.

The argument has been presented several times. You are holding your hands over your ears and screaming "LALALALALALALA" because the argument destroys your position.

You mean the argument that gay sex is "normal?" I'm new here, run it past me again.

You have presented no evidence to counter the evidence presented. Obviously because you have NONE.

Evidence to counter your evidence? You mean besides the fact that half of MSM are dying of AIDS? Yeah I get it. "But they looooove each other!"
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

You mean besides the fact that half of MSM are dying of AIDS? Yeah I get it. "But they looooove each other!"

Yes, let's take a look at this stat.

You are saying 50% of gays are dying from AIDS without gay marriage being legalized across the board. How does this stat factor into gay marriage?

Since marriage is supposed to promote monogomy, this would actually have the impact of LOWERING that percentage. Thank you StevenA59 for pointing out why gay marriage being legalized would actually help prmote and help reduce this stat and adding another reason why gay marriage should be legalized.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

Evidence to counter your evidence? You mean besides the fact that half of MSM are dying of AIDS? Yeah I get it. "But they looooove each other!"

Ummm, where are you getting that stat from?
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

Evidence and proof in your mind only. Perhaps you should pick up a dictionary and look up the world "debate."

Perhaps YOU should pick up a dictionary and look up the word "evidence". You obviously have no understanding as to it's meaning, since it is what I have presented and you have avoided.




Completely insubstatial response as usual. Your beliefs are irrelevant when it comes to legalities. You have no right to NOT be offended. Prove me wrong on this, with legally based evidence, or admit you've got nothing.



Legal issues based on ethics and morals. Really you are just wasting my time now.

You've been wasting everyone's time with an invalid postion that you refuse to substantiate because you cannot. Irrelevant what they are based on. They are law. You STILL have no right to NOT be offended. Prove me wrong with legal evidence, or admit you've got nothing.



You can keep attacking my position but it won't help yours any.

Your position is so weak, there is little to attack. Only thing you've presented is "I don't like it, so I don't want it".



You mean the argument that gay sex is "normal?" I'm new here, run it past me again.

Easy. Normal is a value judgement and therefore is a logical fallacy.

Good. Now you've learned something.



Evidence to counter your evidence? You mean besides the fact that half of MSM are dying of AIDS? Yeah I get it. "But they looooove each other!"

Prove your assertion with evidence from valid links. And then tell us how that counters anything that anyone has said supporting GM. If you cannot or refuse, admit that you have nothing.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

Moderator's Warning:
And I have had about enough of the trolling. Evidence for information and statistics has been requested. If it is not provided, or admitted that it does not exist, I will be issuing consequences for trolling.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

Yes, let's take a look at this stat.

You are saying 50% of gays are dying from AIDS without gay marriage being legalized across the board. How does this stat factor into gay marriage?

Since marriage is supposed to promote monogomy, this would actually have the impact of LOWERING that percentage. Thank you StevenA59 for pointing out why gay marriage being legalized would actually help prmote and help reduce this stat and adding another reason why gay marriage should be legalized.

He opposes same-sex marriage, therefore he is encouraging the sort of risky sexual behavior that spreads HIV. Therefore, he wants gay people to die!

Hey, it makes about as much sense as his "logical" arguments. Look, guys, you oppose same-sex marriage for emotional and religious reasons. Fine, it's your right to think that way. Trying to justify it in other terms is just lunacy.
 
Last edited:
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/FastFacts-MSM-FINAL508COMP.pdf

I posted it five minutes ago. Now you've lost your temper and are bringing out the guns. Enough of this.

You cannot read information, accurately. You claimed that half of all MSM folks are dying of AIDS. That is NOT what the information says. Here is the quote from your link:

MSM account for nearly half of the more than one million people living with HIV in the U.S. (48%, or an estimated
532,000 total persons).

Half of the people who have AIDS are MSM... not half of MSM folks have AIDS.

You are wrong... so do you want to show some integrity and admit that you misread the information?
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

OK... so we have ALL obliterated Steve's erroneous claim. Let's see if he admits it.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

OK... so we have ALL obliterated Steve's erroneous claim. Let's see if he admits it.

Either that or you could go with his logic and claim that half of all straight people have AIDS.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

Easy. Normal is a value judgement and therefore is a logical fallacy.

That's your "proof?" Thanks for the laugh.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

That's your "proof?" Thanks for the laugh.

What's to laugh at? He's 100% correct here; the proof was in your making a value judgment and, therefore, committing a fallacy.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

That's wrong. HE claims "normal is a value judgement" which is supposed to prove somehow that gay marriage is okay? Wow, the lack of critical thinking here is stunning. You see, you can't prove a point by claiming everyone else is wrong.

Yes I admit I misread the statistics. But even if the number is one in ten (as in this study) it is hardly a ringing endorsement for gay marriage or homosexual lifestyle.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

Then there's the claim that gay marriages would lead to a more monogamous lifestyle, while simultaneously pointing to the fact that straights have a 50% divorce rate. Is someone suggesting that gays are more monogamous than straights? I'd like to see the evidence of that lol. This is a "kitchen sink" style of debate that entails throwing tons of senseless crap and hoping something sticks. I'll be looking for another forum where people can demonstrate a tad bit of critical thinking. Laters.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

That's wrong. HE claims "normal is a value judgement" which is supposed to prove somehow that gay marriage is okay? Wow, the lack of critical thinking here is stunning. You see, you can't prove a point by claiming everyone else is wrong.

The idea of normal depends entirely on appropriateness within a certain context. In this case, the context is a social one, which can change with time, place, people, expectations, morals, resources, or any other number of variables. In other words, what is good and useful within one situation may not be so in another. However, ultimately, because we are dealing with society, and societies vary, there can never be such thing as an objective normal standard, again, because it depends on the context in which it is held.

So, something may seem normal to you, or me, or CC. But that idea of normal is going to be different, because we are all individuals with different ideas. Ultimately, this means it is a value judgement because of our different internal contexts.

So yeah, what CC said, with a little critical thinking to satisfy your complaint.

Yes I admit I misread the statistics. But even if the number is one in ten (as in this study) it is hardly a ringing endorsement for gay marriage or homosexual lifestyle.

People are often going to behave to stereotypes that are forced on them by the greater society. Sociology 101. Conservsely, if a more tradition setting is allowed and somewhat more expected, people are going to be more likely to take up those roles and those numbers will drop.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

That's wrong. HE claims "normal is a value judgement" which is supposed to prove somehow that gay marriage is okay?

OK is another value judgment. Further, he didn't say "gay marriage is ok because normal is a value judgment". He said your stance was lacking because it relied on a value judment. You should take a breath and think before you post.

Wow, the lack of critical thinking here is stunning. You see, you can't prove a point by claiming everyone else is wrong.

That's not what's happening here. However, in a debate, it is in the best interest of the opponent to diminish the arguments of the other side and point out where they are invalid.

Yes I admit I misread the statistics. But even if the number is one in ten (as in this study) it is hardly a ringing endorsement for gay marriage or homosexual lifestyle.

Well, if it's 9 in 10 heterosexuals dying of AIDS, that's not really a ringing endorsement of heterosexuals either. :shrug:

I keep thinking you are on the verge of making a point here but you keep falling short. Do you need a moment to collect your thoughts, breathe, and then come back to this when you have figured out what it is you are trying to say?
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

Then there's the claim that gay marriages would lead to a more monogamous lifestyle, while simultaneously pointing to the fact that straights have a 50% divorce rate. Is someone suggesting that gays are more monogamous than straights? I'd like to see the evidence of that lol. This is a "kitchen sink" style of debate that entails throwing tons of senseless crap and hoping something sticks. I'll be looking for another forum where people can demonstrate a tad bit of critical thinking. Laters.

No, the point of bringing up the 50% divorce rate was to point out that straights have no room to talk about sanctity when it comes to marriage. Secondly, 50% divorce rate in heterosexuals doesn't diminish the benefit of increased monogamy that is a result of the institution of marriage to start with. There are a plethora of beneficial social changes that occur because of marriage; monogamy is but one debatable benefit.
 
Re: After Final Arguments in Prop. 8 Trial, Maggie Gallagher Expects Judge will Overt

I understand you aren't interested in the debate anymore once I proved how easily your own argument can be used for so many other alternative lifestyles so let's agree to disagree on this one.

Let's see, you have failed to do this, entirely. You have failed to counter any argument for gay marriage. You have claimed you could prove something that you have entirely failed to claim, but you have managed to make a painfully long list of entirely irrelevant and without context.
 
Back
Top Bottom