• 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!

Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

Not to mention condoning or actively ordering/facilitating the murder of children in response to insults (II Kings 2:23-24), the total extermination of a group of people (Joshua 6-8) and the enslavement of women and children (Deuteronomy 20:13-14)

Also, I have provided significant evidence of in-vitro sexuality determination that mac seems to have completely ignored...

I haven't intentionally ignored you...can you rehash it?
 
According to mac, as long as the majority believe it, it's okay to base laws on religion.

In a democracy, the majority rules. Our whole system of goverment of based on religion. Our founding fathers were very religious.
 
Last edited:
Ever heard of the phrase "tyranny of the majority"?

Yeah, we both know that there are protections for the minorities in the US and that they don't negate Democracy.
 
In a democracy, the majority rules. Our whole system of goverment of based on religion. Our founding fathers were very religious.

We are not a democracy, we are a representative republic. Democracy is nothing but mob rules, and is a bad form of government.

And our government is not based on religion at all, you are fooling yourself if you think it is, and our founding fathers were not as religious as you think.
 
Last edited:
In a democracy, the majority rules. Our whole system of goverment of based on religion. Our founding fathers were very religious.

They chose which religious morals they wanted to influence American society, which is why they wrote the bill of rights instead of the ten commandments.
 
In a democracy, the majority rules.

We are a Constitutional Republic. The will of the people is the Constitution of the United States not a 51% vote.

Our whole system of goverment of based on religion.

Our system of government specifically excludes religion and was based on the philosophies Plato and many Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke. There can be no established state religion according to our Constitutoin.

Our founding fathers were very religious.

Most of the founding fathers were deists. Thomas Jefferson went so far as to create his own Bible, literally cutting out every miracle and supernatural event from the New Testament and leaving just the teachings of Jesus Christ.

The Jefferson Bible

I don't know where you learned government and history, but your teacher should be shot.
 
We are not a democracy, we are a representative republic. Democracy is nothing but mob rules, and is a bad form of government.

And our government is not based on religion at all, you are fooling yourself if you think it is, and our founding fathers were not as religious as you think.

I wouldn't go as far as to say our Founding Fathers weren't all that religious (they were all individuals, some were, some weren't, some supported the doctrine of secular government but still believed in the value of Christian ideals)

But clearly our Constitution had more to do with Lockean classical liberalism and the Roman Republic than anything else.
 
Yeah, we both know that there are protections for the minorities in the US and that they don't negate Democracy.

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.
 
I haven't intentionally ignored you...can you rehash it?

My argument, quoted for convenience:

It has been proven that, in certain cases at least, there was a direct correlation between fraternal birth order and homosexuality, meaning that in these cases, sexuality was determined in-vitro. Again, I point you to fraternal birth order.

Link

Direct quote:
The fraternal birth order effect is the strongest known predictor of sexual orientation. According to several studies, each older brother increases a man's odds of developing a homosexual orientation by 28–48%.

Bogaert (2006) replicated the fraternal birth order effect on male sexual orientation, in a sample including both biological siblings and adopted siblings. Only the older biological brothers influenced sexual orientation; there was no effect of adopted siblings. Bogaert concluded that his finding strongly suggest a prenatal origin to the fraternal birth-order effect.
 
In a democracy, the majority rules. Our whole system of goverment of based on religion. Our founding fathers were very religious.

Ah, but our government is not a democratic government. It is a Republic government. And no, not all of our founding fathers were "very religious". Some were agnostic.


Edit note: I should have read the previous page fully before posting this as other people said the same thing...only better. My bad. :p
 
Last edited:
Is it just me or is Mac and religion getting a smack down in this thread? More so than normal that is....
 
In this case the equal protection clause comes into play. imho.

I agree it would seem to. But the states can group individuals, and if it were that simple....it would have been done by now.
 
I wouldn't go as far as to say our Founding Fathers weren't all that religious (they were all individuals, some were, some weren't, some supported the doctrine of secular government but still believed in the value of Christian ideals)

The deist claim is just revisonism. The great majority of the founding fathers were very much Christian and are on record stating that.

But clearly our Constitution had more to do with Lockean classical liberalism and the Roman Republic than anything else.

I agree completely. This doesn't negate the influence of religious beliefs, specifically Christian, on our government and laws. I'm not in anyway trying to claim our government is a Theocracy or should be, but the truth is the truth.
 
My argument, quoted for convenience:

Everything I've read about fraternal birth order previously cites the influence of older brothers outside the womb. That would make it learned. This study claiming it to be prenatal influence is a one off, and appears to have some inconsistencies with it's methods.
 
Is it just me or is Mac and religion getting a smack down in this thread? More so than normal that is....

I'm out-numbered, here, for sure. And religion seems to be getting the majority of attention in this thread.
 
Because it's unnecessary at this point. It's definitely something I counsel on a personal level though.

By excluding the lifelong aspect, you are erdifing marriage away from it's traditional definition. Doing so invalidates your argument against a subsequent redefinition.
 
Everything I've read about fraternal birth order previously cites the influence of older brothers outside the womb. That would make it learned. This study claiming it to be prenatal influence is a one off, and appears to have some inconsistencies with it's methods.

There is no evidence to support that notion, that is your own personal attempt to assimilate the information so that you don't have to accommodate your religious beliefs to the evidence. That is why it is ridiculous to provide you any scientific evidence. You will simply make up your own personal interpretation of what the evidence means so that you don't have to change your religious beliefs. As such, you are infinitely more skeptical about the innateness of homosexuality than of the fallibility of the Bible. There isn't even any sense for you to be on a debate forum, because every debate is going to end, "my religious beliefs say" and given that you hold your religious beliefs as infallible and will simply treat any scientific evidence that are contrary to them as subject to interpretation the only thing you can accomplish here is further entrenching yourself in your already preconceived beliefs.

Hence why it is completely pointless to debate conformists like yourself. You even refuse to provide an explanation of why "choice" is even a factor in whether homosexuality is right or wrong, which makes it clear to me that you aren't even completely aware of why you believe everything you believe.
 
Last edited:
I'm out-numbered, here, for sure. And religion seems to be getting the majority of attention in this thread.

Get use to it, because over the next few decades it is only going to get worse.
 
We are not a democracy, we are a representative republic. Democracy is nothing but mob rules, and is a bad form of government.

And our government is not based on religion at all, you are fooling yourself if you think it is, and our founding fathers were not as religious as you think.

And the earth is not round.
 
Back
Top Bottom