• 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!

The Face of Gay Marriage? Video clip from Maine newscast

AlbqOwl said:
To Jallman:

Again it was unfortunate that the extremists were allowed to frame the debate. I think reasonable people have to not allow the extremists on any side of any debate determine what side we will come down on. But I like to keep things precise too. It's what keeps me active on these discussion boards. :)
Click to expand...

You're a good lady, Alb. I wish you were around more often. ;)
 
Jerry said:
Homosexuals can marry anyone of the opposite sex just like everyone else.

Equality achieved.
Click to expand...

So are you against inter-racial marriage? Because even if inter-racial marriage were banned everyone would still have the same rights to marry people of the same race.

Jerry, your logic is flawed. This is a civil rights issue.
 
AlbqOwl said:
It does change the definition if anybody other than a man and woman marry because until recently the definition of marriage was regarded as one man and one woman in all 50 states.
Click to expand...


That's not changing the definition, AlbqOwl, that's eliminating inequality and discrimination. Just as striking down miscegenation laws didn't re-define marriage, neither will allowing same-sex couples to marry re-define marriage. Nothing in the basic structure is changed, only discrimination is removed.
 
Jerry said:
Let's say i do....




Poligamy ftw :2wave:

But I think your "non-related" comment is fairly bigoted, as 1: familial relation is a protected class while sexual orientation is not, and 2: people with other inheritable genetic diseases are allowed to marry, so there's no reason not to allow incest.
Click to expand...
polygamy is a different story, as is incest. but you know that, right?
 
Jerry said:
I'm a pragmatic, goal-oriented person. As such, if I don't see how gay-marriage helps accomplish the goal of reducing the divorce/juvenile-crime/teen-pregnancy rates, then I'll see it as a distraction and I'm more likely to treat gay-marriage with hostility.

"Gays will also have a 50% divorce rate" is not a compelling argument when we don't want a 50% divorce rate to begin with. In this way gay-marriage is seen as making the problem worse by legitimizing divorce.
Click to expand...

I do not see why we would compare or expect gay marriage to reduce juvenile crime or teen pregnancy rates , also with out legal marriages how can we know what the divorce rate will be? I guess I just think it is right because I believe a person can not help who they love and they should be allowed to marry that person if they so choose .
 
It's funny one old vet gets up and says gay marriage is OK and the libs go crazy. How many vets say different, and why don't you hold them up?

This is silly is all I am saying. The face of gay marriage, yea and I am the face of save the whales because I am a vet. :roll:

PS I do support gay marraige as a states issue. I don't agree with it morally, but as a secular institution the current policy is unfair.
 
ScottD said:
So are you against inter-racial marriage?
Click to expand...

Not realy, no. Why do you ask?

ScottD said:
Because even if inter-racial marriage were banned everyone would still have the same rights to marry people of the same race.
Click to expand...

Loving had no issue with that until racial purity was brought in.

There is no sexual equivalent to racial purity.

ScottD said:
Jerry, your logic is flawed. This is a civil rights issue.
Click to expand...

If my logic were flawed you would have found a problem. Instead, you fond only that you didn't understand, which is perfectly fine.
 
submarinepainter said:
I do not see why we would compare or expect gay marriage to reduce juvenile crime or teen pregnancy rates,
Click to expand...

If it's not going to help the problem, it's a distraction, and treated with hostility.

submarinepainter said:
also with out legal marriages how can we know what the divorce rate will be?
Click to expand...

You could drive examples using countries or states who have legalized gay-marriage.

submarinepainter said:
I guess I just think it is right because I believe a person can not help who they love and they should be allowed to marry that person if they so choose.
Click to expand...

Oh I didn't realize you supported incest. Your point of view makes sense to me now.
 
Jerry said:
Oh I didn't realize you supported incest. Your point of view makes sense to me now.
Click to expand...

oh knock it off !! I will not support incest in anyway as I am willing to bet that most gays would not, I am talking about adults (that are not related) having a free choice , this doesn't not include animals , children or relations oh and space aliens!!
 
Jerry said:
If it's not going to help the problem, it's a distraction, and treated with hostility.
Click to expand...

Wait...you don't see the hostility it's treated with as a distraction in and of itself.

How about if the anti-gm side did something constructive with their money and energy like charity work and social activism to fight real social problems instead of attacking something that doesn't affect them to start with?
 
Jerry said:
Marriage is not about equality as gay-marriage is not a civil rights issue. It never was.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know. It was always about male property rights. Definitely not equality.
 
Redress said:
Bull****, bull****, and bull****


You keep trying to spin gay marriage in any way you can, but the truth is, it is a civil rights issue, as he put it, every adult should be able to marry the adult of their choice. Your intense fear of gay's being able to marry is amusing, but it's hardly going to stop things from changing, and you are either going to have to get over it, or live in fear.
Click to expand...
How many wives can you have? Can you marry your widowed or divorced mother, or sister?
 
My friend recently got married to a Muslim man and it did not involve a provincial marriage license whatsoever. In Islam, the only thing that validates marriage is the vows between partners and the marriage in the eyes of their community. They'll only seek a marriage license if they want state benefits, and that, in my view, is what this argument is actually about. Too many bigots hide behind the idea that your marriage isn't real unless it's licensed, and yet they protest expansion of government powers; well, look in the mirror, bucko. Marriage is about families and communities, period. Two gay people can and do get married, and it's legitimate to those who matter most.

The ceremony is irrelevant to the state licensing process. People can have any religious or community ceremony they want. This is about one type of partnership getting benefits while other types of partners are excluded, even though all kinds of partnerships are involved in raising children. If heterosexuals get to receive benefits using my tax dollars, then I should get the same benefits when I someday marry a man. It's just that simple. And I want homosexual parents to have all the state benefits that heterosexuals get for raising their families. Conservatives who claim to be about family values hypocritically gloss over this fact in their non-stop tirade against homosexual equality.

Separate but equal does not work. Every argument I've heard against marriage are arguments that have been generated by neo-con think tanks in the United States. They use specific legal and constitutional minutiae to bog down the argument. The bottom line is, this is an equality issue, and it won't rest until equilibrium is reached. That day will come, and the conservative right can either accept that fact, or live in misery. Either way, I don't give a toss what they think. Most of the Western world embraces licensing for homosexual partnerships. The U.S. is just a little slow on the uptake, but it'll come around.

I'm also not interested in what people think the historical relationship is to modern marriage. The issue is so diverse globally that there is no 'correct' answer. You can isolate any culture you want to prove your point. This is about the rights of the people in modern society, in your country, and issues relevant to now. I don't really care what some society did in the bronze age.
 
liblady said:
polygamy is a different story...
Click to expand...

Not by your standard, no, it's not.

You asked "do you want to marry a non related adult"...I can't marry a non-related adult if I or that adult are already married.

By your logic polygamists are not being treated equally.

You didn't include a marriage qualifier in your question so I'm free to assume whatever value for that attribute I see fit and argue accordingly.
 
submarinepainter said:
oh knock it off !! I will not support incest in anyway as I am willing to bet that most gays would not, I am talking about adults (that are not related) having a free choice , this doesn't not include animals , children or relations oh and space aliens!!
Click to expand...

Incest is necessarily a logical consequence of "a person can not help who they love and they should be allowed to marry that person if they so choose".

***
I would argue that a person does have a strong control over exactly who they love, but that wasn't your point.
 
Last edited:
jallman said:
Wait...you don't see the hostility it's treated with as a distraction in and of itself.
Click to expand...

I think you're right, which only generates more hostility at yet another distraction, compelling me to get rid of the root cause even more.

Swat the mosquito and scratch the itch.

jallman said:
How about if the anti-gm side did something constructive with their money and energy like charity work and social activism to fight real social problems instead of attacking something that doesn't affect them to start with?
Click to expand...

I didn't see that on the ballot....

ballot said:
Changes California Constitution to eliminate right of same-sex couples to marry. Provides that only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

  • Yes
  • Donate $_______ to ________
  • No
Click to expand...

If you don't like my opinion, don't ask for my vote ;)
 
Last edited:
This world needs more Philip Spooners! The man is a hero:)
 
Redress said:
I was waiting for the polygamy red herring. You are using all the same tired old arguments that have been destroyed time and again.
Click to expand...

Has beastilty been brought up yet? They love to use that one too:roll:
 
submarinepainter said:
oh knock it off !! I will not support incest in anyway as I am willing to bet that most gays would not, I am talking about adults (that are not related) having a free choice , this doesn't not include animals , children or relations oh and space aliens!!
Click to expand...

Why are you opposed to incest? As long as it is legal adults? I do not care one bit:(

Of course breeding is of some concern. :doh
 
Jerry said:
Marriage is not about equality as gay-marriage is not a civil rights issue. It never was. Also, his military service has absolutely nothing to do with gay-marriage in any way. Shame on pro-gm for using this vet as a tool.
Click to expand...

it is if you happen to be the one discriminated against. maybe if you glance at it from the other side of the post once you may well see that it is a civil right issue.
 
Jerry said:
Gay marriage was never about equality, and CA proves it.
Click to expand...

CA proves Jefferson was right democracy is simply mob rule. it is a civil right issue and is about equality.
 
Jerry said:
Homosexuals can marry anyone of the opposite sex just like everyone else.

Equality achieved.
Click to expand...

that is not equality they cannot marry the person they want to. that is not equal. it is interesting that you know how do do word play.
 
Jerry said:
Yeah I've seen those lists, their about as fake as this alleged right to visit a spouse in the hospital, being filled with companies failing on their own to comply with the law or unexplored legal issues.
Click to expand...

fake by whos definition. is this just your opinion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom