• 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!

Dems approve draft of same-sex marriage plank for convention platform

If you seriously think you can rectify SSM with Christianity digsbe, all I can say is "good luck". I am sure the black pastors would agree.


Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.

You've completely avoided my question. As a Christian I currently believe that the Bible states that homosexuality is sinful. However, I don't believe in forcing that belief on others by saying because I think they are sinning that they can't get married. Re-read my post and address the questions I've asked. If you're going to legislate on the grounds of "The Bible says it's wrong" when why allow other sexual sins, like pre-marital sex, adultery and rampant divorce for pretty much any reason?
 
Regardless, it's still good to have it on the platform, if only to help push democrats running in local elections to that side of the debate and encourage people with that view to run in local elections.

There are quite a few democratic Senate candidates that are not happy to see this plank.

Senate Democrats facing difficult reelections are breaking with President Obama’s endorsement of same-sex marriage, a sign the issue is politically dangerous in battleground states.

Sens. Jon Tester (Mont.) and Claire McCaskill (Mo.), the two most vulnerable Democratic senators, have declined to endorse Obama’s call for the legalization of gay marriage.

Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Bob Casey (Pa.) and Bill Nelson (Fla.), Democrats who have easier races but in states that could become more competitive by November, have also backed away from Obama’s stance
Vulnerable Democratic senators balk at Obama's gay marriage endorsement - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com
 
Last edited:
You beat me to it.

Marriage is not a federal issue. The whole gay marriage issue at the federal level is just a way to gain political points without actually addressing any of the real issues that the feds should be taking care of:

the economy
illegal immigration
Iraq and Afganistan
that pesky budget imbalance

among others.

Can you tell us what the limit is on items on a party platform?
 
Can you tell us what the limit is on items on a party platform?

Obviously, there is no limit.

Just load up the platform on issues that really don't matter, but that bring an emotional response from the electorate, then ignore the real issues that government needs to address. Those are just too controversial, and there are no easy answers to any of them anyway.
 
You beat me to it.

Marriage is not a federal issue. The whole gay marriage issue at the federal level is just a way to gain political points without actually addressing any of the real issues that the feds should be taking care of:

the economy
illegal immigration
Iraq and Afganistan
that pesky budget imbalance

among others.

Obama has no intention to help gays wed. He's already said its a States rights issue. Just another ploy to get votes.

Please do it, please. You all may not like it, but gay marriage gets defeated in blue states as well. That means it's also dems and independents voting against it. They feel strongly enough about the issue to buck party.

Stupid move before the election. This may act as a third party sapper would.

Even California voters voted it down.
 
Obviously, there is no limit.

Just load up the platform on issues that really don't matter, but that bring an emotional response from the electorate, then ignore the real issues that government needs to address. Those are just too controversial, and there are no easy answers to any of them anyway.

For a lot of people it does really matter.
 
You've completely avoided my question. As a Christian I currently believe that the Bible states that homosexuality is sinful. However, I don't believe in forcing that belief on others by saying because I think they are sinning that they can't get married. Re-read my post and address the questions I've asked. If you're going to legislate on the grounds of "The Bible says it's wrong" when why allow other sexual sins, like pre-marital sex, adultery and rampant divorce for pretty much any reason?

It is one thing to have no law making a sinful act illegal, it is another to give a state imprimatur to such acts.

And I think the slow slouch towards SSM began with no fault divorce. If the government is going to be in the business of officially sanctioning human relationships, there ought to be well defined ground rules.


Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.
 
It is one thing to have no law making a sinful act illegal, it is another to give a state imprimatur to such acts.

And I think the slow slouch towards SSM began with no fault divorce. If the government is going to be in the business of officially sanctioning human relationships, there ought to be well defined ground rules.


Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.

Government is not in the business of deciding what is sinful, they are in the business of assuring equal rights to every citizen, period. What you deem a sin and what I deem a sin are quite different.
 
Government is not in the business of deciding what is sinful, they are in the business of assuring equal rights to every citizen, period. What you deem a sin and what I deem a sin are quite different.

Polygamy, prostitution and recreational drug use? Many things are not legal ONLY because of "morals" or religious reasons. Gov't MUST be in the business of defining limits and we have allowed the majority to do just that - as long as no constituional rights are violated. You may LIKE the limit of two partners in marriage and I may like the limit of them being of opposite genders, but the law is still the law us neither SSM nor polygamy is a right.
 
Polygamy, prostitution and recreational drug use? Many things are not legal ONLY because of "morals" or religious reasons. Gov't MUST be in the business of defining limits and we have allowed the majority to do just that - as long as no constituional rights are violated. You may LIKE the limit of two partners in marriage and I may like the limit of them being of opposite genders, but the law is still the law us neither SSM nor polygamy is a right.

There does have to be good cause...generally general welfare...in order to restrict rights. If you can come up with a good reason that society is protected from two gay guys getting gay married THEN you can compare it to prostitution or drug use.
 
Good for the black pastors. I have anecdotally observed that black folk in the south are more religiously observant and faithful than the white folks, and its spurred me to be more observant of my faith rituals. All Christians should follow their example and publicly affirm traditional marriage and oppose SSM.


Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.

Yes, the black pastors is an example of religion being misused to justify personal fears and insecurities.

The pastors could learn something from the play/film Inherit the Wind.
 
Dems approve draft of same-sex marriage plank for convention platform – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs



About time. It has been embarrassing that my party has been so slow on this. At least one of the political parties is trying to enter the 21st century.

This is great news for Republicans and Romney.......It is a clear distinction bewtween the 2 parties.........The dems are trolling for the gay vote again (which they already have) and I believe that a lot of democrats with traditional values might vote for Romney because of this issue.........
 
Yes, the black pastors is an example of religion being misused to justify personal fears and insecurities.

The pastors could learn something from the play/film Inherit the Wind.

And of course when Sharpton or Jackson solicitt black votes from the pulpit in black churches you have no problem with that
 
I'm sure you feel the same way about segregation......
 
I wonder how many Gay and Lesbian couples are Republicans, Libertarians, Independents, and Moderates who normally vote Republican (Conservative)? Would any of those people consider switching sides due to the new Democratic Party plank?

Could the African-American Bible thumper crew already be voting Republican and just want to make some noise?

Who's the bigger group?

I don't know myself, but I'll guarantee you that it's been heavily researched by the Democratic Party prior to making this announcement.
 
Those who are hoping that historical opposition in the African-American community to SSM may be strong enough to take down the President's re-election bid just might be wrong.

After President Obama’s announcement, opposition to same-sex marriage hits record low
Overall, 53 percent of Americans say gay marriage should be legal, hitting a high mark in support while showing a dramatic turnaround from just six years ago, when just 36 percent thought it should be legal. Thirty-nine percent, a new low, say gay marriage should be illegal.

The poll also finds that 59 percent of African Americans say they support same-sex marriage, up from an average of 41 percent in polls leading up to Obama’s announcement of his new position on the matter.

The NAACP has endorsed SSM. At the convention this year, protests by the Coalition of African-American Pastors brought some of the first news stories that mentioned the CAAP. Prior to the convention, the CAAP does not appear to have done very much that was newsworthy.

Ben Jealous, President of the NAACP
... said in June that the civil rights group's board, which has 64 members, was overwhelmingly in favor of the measure.

"If you go to the board, you'll see a lot of religious leaders," Jealous told The Huffington Post last month. "All of the religious leaders on our board, except for one, were for marriage equality."

"What you've seen in the black community in the wake of Obama's decision and then ours is that people actually stop and think about it intensely and in clear terms about what are the rights of religions versus the responsibilities of government,"
 
Answering a poll question doesn't necessarily translate into a motivated voter. A majority of poll respondents may well support SSM when asked, but how many are interested enough in the issue to vote on it? SSM has been consistently defeated when put to a statewide vote so far.

Presidential elections belong to those who have the most motivated voters. In our closely divided partisan nation, a few hundred votes in a few key districts can make the difference between the White House and a concession speech.

I assure you that Obama's strategists are taking the CAAP seriously.


Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.
 
Answering a poll question doesn't necessarily translate into a motivated voter. A majority of poll respondents may well support SSM when asked, but how many are interested enough in the issue to vote on it? SSM has been consistently defeated when put to a statewide vote so far.


Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.

The question posed could well be re-phrased as follows: poll respondents may well support or oppose SSM when asked, but how many are interested enough in this single issue to change who they vote for President?
 
The question posed could well be re-phrased as follows: poll respondents may well support or oppose SSM when asked, but how many are interested enough in this single issue to change who they vote for President?

Probably not very many, and the ones who are adamantly, fervently against gay marriage are the same ones who wouldn't vote for a Democrat if he were running against Beelzebub.

Gay marriage is just not a big issue. Moreover, it is not a federal issue at all.
 
Good for the black pastors. I have anecdotally observed that black folk in the south are more religiously observant and faithful than the white folks, and its spurred me to be more observant of my faith rituals. All Christians should follow their example and publicly affirm traditional marriage and oppose SSM.


Sent from my homing pigeon using Crapatalk.

It's funny how recent studies of shown that homosexuals, stay together longer than heterosexuals. Kids are less likely to be abused with a gay couple, they are more happier. Hell, some gay-couples are better parents, than most straight couples, but I fail to see the logic in fighting SSM. You want homosexuals to be miserable and not marry, because you don't believe in it, because your "God" says, its wrong. I have news to, we weren't founded on Christanity, it was the opposite. Our founding fathers stresses FREEDOM OF RELIGION. So, last time I checked our President ran this country along with the senate and a supreme court, not any type of gods or goddess.
 
Links to those studies please?
 
Back
Top Bottom