• 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!

California gay marriage ban overturned: report

Status
Not open for further replies.
You don't have to accept jack ****. You don't even have to watch their parades. You can go on hating gays and gay marriage as much as you want. But you can't actually infringe upon the rights of others.

That your opinion but gays are demanding the be accepted as normal GLSEN is doing that
 
Why? And the homosexual movement is imposing their morality upon others. If anything, the fact that homosexuality is not marriage because it is unnatural and unfit for procreation is enough to prevent it from equality with real marriage.

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about.
 
This is an interesting statement. Where and when did Scalia state this? In Lawrence vs. Texas, O'Connor decided her vote in favor of gay rights based on the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Scalia did not sign on to that.

If you have any more information on this, I would like to see it.

I was hoping you would stop by for this thread. What is your thinking on the ruling. I really value your opinion.
 
I doubt anyone from westboro has the mental capacity to even be a judge.
But do you think someone with openly far right anti-gay views could unbiasedly rule on a gay marriage issue? Would you want a right wing partisan judge to rule on the Patriot Act if that was brought to court?
Also you can have your beliefs, I could care less how you think about gay people. But don't force those beliefs on other people. Marriage isn't a religious thing in the US legally. If you don't like gay marriage then don't get one. Allowing gay people equal rights under the law won't effect you in any way.

So then why is it ok for homosexuals and those who support it to force their beliefs that homosexual unions equate with hetero marriage down everyone's throats? An inclusive definition does not mean that the definition itself is not imposing beliefs. All laws impose beliefs upon others. Marriage is a social thing that is put into law by society. So, California asked society to define marriage. They didn't hear what they wanted, so plan B was to make it illegal to have an opinion against gay marriage anyway. Please, don't be blind to the obvious bias and bigotry that is being purported by the homosexual agenda in California.
 
A state can not judge legal status because that is a federal issue. You can not pick and chose which fed issues states can enforce

The States are held to the rights and liberties of the individual, the same as the Federal government. All government is restricted upon these lines. We have set up checks and balances to ensure this is kept. Thus even the State cannot make laws which violate the rights and liberties of the individual.
 
Why? And the homosexual movement is imposing their morality upon others. If anything, the fact that homosexuality is not marriage because it is unnatural and unfit for procreation is enough to prevent it from equality with real marriage.

No they are not. They just want to be left alone by religious zealots and their dark age fantasies of imposing Teh Almighteh GAWD!!! upon their private lives. You are having nothing imposed on you as long as you stay the hell out of a gay wedding and don't marry a gay.

As for the rest of your appeal to nature...its a fallacy. Until you add the requirement of procreation to the marriage license, you have no point with that little rant.
 
That your opinion but gays are demanding the be accepted as normal GLSEN is doing that

Not quite true. Gays are demanding that the law treats them the same as every one else.
 
Because I'm not beholden to your gods rules. That's your damned problem. And again, homosexuals are not imposing their morality upon you. Give up that tired and utterly stupid mantra. No one says you have to accept it, no one says you have to like it. All that's being said is that you cannot infringe upon the rights of others.

It's the wienie, "I'm offended" argument. :roll:
 
cheney presumably supports this ruling

obama's a coward

it is what it is

congrats, friends and neighbors of all persuasions

have a good one, mary
 
That your opinion but gays are demanding the be accepted as normal GLSEN is doing that

And guess what. If you don't accept it, you ain't gonna be thrown in jail. There ain't **** they can do about it. Just like there ain't **** you can justly do to prevent same sex marriage.
 
I don't care if you call all gay people faggot, sons of Dorthy and absolutely hate them.
I don't care if you accept them personally but legally we have to because that is justice.

The fact is people are allowed to have parades, gay or not.
People are allowed to associate with other people that are similar to them.

That is the Constitution as written.
Now you can try to rewrite it but I'll be against that as well.

I resent you putting words in my mouth I have not said any of that. Is that how you show hate to those that disagree with you?
 
Why? And the homosexual movement is imposing their morality upon others. If anything, the fact that homosexuality is not marriage because it is unnatural and unfit for procreation is enough to prevent it from equality with real marriage.

Marriage is not about procreation for everyone, it is about a union of people. My sister and brother-in-law have tried to have children but cannot. Is their marriage any less moral than any other?
 
Why? And the homosexual movement is imposing their morality upon others. If anything, the fact that homosexuality is not marriage because it is unnatural and unfit for procreation is enough to prevent it from equality with real marriage.

Wrong. Marriage is a legal partnership, not a religious institution in the US. Yes there can be religious ceremony, but there really pointless in regards to the law. Gay marriage proponents are not pushing their morality on you, if they were they would be forcing you to get a gay marriage. But there not, they just want to be equal under the law. The fact is that there is no non religious argument against gay marriage, so please if you don't agree with gay marriage, don't get one, but don't deny the rights of others.
 
cheney presumably supports this ruling

obama's a coward

it is what it is

congrats, friends and neighbors of all persuasions

have a good one, mary

I think we are having a good one. Not even your mindless rants about Obama can derail the good mood we have.
 
Ok first you claim the constitution does not apply to the states

Now you are claiming that the government has no power to tax nonprofits

Where are you getting your legal ideas from?

Non profits are tax exempt
 
Why? And the homosexual movement is imposing their morality upon others. If anything, the fact that homosexuality is not marriage because it is unnatural and unfit for procreation is enough to prevent it from equality with real marriage.

The only people forcing their lifestyle on me are Evanglical Christians. I've not yet had someone knock on my door and give me a brochure to become gay. I have, however, had several different denominations of Christians try to convert me to their way of life.

Further, I'm not aware of "gay camps" where you can send your straight kid to gay him up; whereas, I know that there are multiple camps for scaring the gay out of kids with Jesus and threats of damnation.

So, who forces their lifestyle upon whom?
 
And Scalia has stated that gay rights could win if they came in as a 14th Amendment issue.

Done and done.

This is an interesting statement. Where and when did Scalia state this? In Lawrence vs. Texas, O'Connor decided her vote in favor of gay rights based on the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. Scalia did not sign on to that.

If you have any more information on this, I would like to see it.
 
I resent you putting words in my mouth I have not said any of that. Is that how you show hate to those that disagree with you?

I didn't say you did but if you did, I wouldn't care.
That's the point, you can not like it and be the most offensive person in the world to gay people.
It wouldn't bother me one bit.

Justice is about applying the rules equally to all people.
 
I'm a biologist, I know very well what I am talking about.

Being a biologist has nothing to do with this, is their biological proof that being gay isn't natural? You should actually talk a bunch of gay people because they are the ones who can tell you the facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom