• 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!

95% of Marines uncomfortable serving with openly gay troops

95% of Fox News viewers in the Marines are uncomfortable with gays in the military? Who knew?

A New York Times national poll in February 2010 shows 58% of Americans favor gays serving openly, compared to 29% opposed.

I could ask 500,000 satanists if they oppose christianity and I'm sure I could get atleast 95%
 
ptif219 said:
The law states who can marry. So then people should have the right to marry as many people as they want
Click to expand...

The state has a legitimate interest in limiting the number of licenses a person can have at a single time. Just as the state can limit the number of driver's licenses or hunting license or fishing licenses, etc. that you can have, the state is allowed to set the number of marriage licenses you can posses to just one. That keeps it fair for everyone and avoids serious complications that arise when people are allowed to have multiple marriage licenses.

Therefore, you comparison is irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Some do. Let's not pretend that is no such thing as a prejudice gay person.
Click to expand...


And I'm sure you have kind of evidence to support your claim, correct?
 
CriticalThought said:
The state has a legitimate interest in limiting the number of licenses a person can have at a single time. Just as the state can limit the number of driver's licenses or hunting license or fishing licenses, etc. that you can have, the state is allowed to set the number of marriage licenses you can posses to just one. That keeps it fair for everyone and avoids serious complications that arise when people are allowed to have multiple marriage licenses.

Therefore, you comparison is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

No it is not. If gays can marry a man should be able to have as many wives as he wants.
 
winston53660 said:
So you are trying to say that a group that opposes a discriminatory law (Sharia) is discrimination in the same vane as the KKK?
Click to expand...

"Oppose Sharia law"?

The EDL is a racial hate group. Today, they hate Muslims. Tomorrow, they'll hate just about everyone; just like all hate groups.

Now that you've been educated, can we get back on track? Or, are you going to continue with the, "only white, southern, American, Conservative, straight males can be racist", crap?
 
apdst said:
"Oppose Sharia law"?

The EDL is a racial hate group. Today, they hate Muslims. Tomorrow, they'll hate just about everyone; just like all hate groups.
Click to expand...

I could not find the face book page from that article. And after checking out their website I doubt they even have one.

Or, are you going to continue with the, "only white, southern, American, Conservative, straight males can be racist", crap?
Click to expand...

When did I ever say that?
 
ptif219 said:
No it is not. If gays can marry a man should be able to have as many wives as he wants.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make any sense. How does the number of marriage licenses a person is allowed to hold change as a result of allowing to people of the same sex to marry.
 
CriticalThought said:
That doesn't make any sense. How does the number of marriage licenses a person is allowed to hold change as a result of allowing to people of the same sex to marry.
Click to expand...

So gays need rights but a man that wants multiple wives that hurts no one has no rights.
 
ptif219 said:
So gays need rights but a man that wants multiple wives that hurts no one has no rights.
Click to expand...

How exactly can he use a legal contract of marriage to assert that his wife has final say in certain legal decisions if he has multiple wives from multiple legal contracts pretty much asserting the same thing? I say if a guy wants to live with several women and call them all "wife", fine. But the legal document of marriage essentially says that the other person in that contract with you has legal say on important matters affecting your life, say that is legally more important than anyone else in your life, including blood relatives. Therefore, if we were to have legal multi-marriages, there would have to be different rules established for settling such issues. Also, how do you settle the case if a man marries a woman who helps him get rich, then marries a second woman to father children for him, but the first woman wants to be able to marry another man as well, eventhough the man doesn't approve? If they decide to divorce over the issue, would she get half his money or a third? What if she was the one to make most of the money during the marriage, then he got married to another woman without her knowing? Would he still be entitled to half of her money or should he be considered committing adultery? What about states that still condemn adultery? Could being married to that other woman without the knowledge of a current wife be grounds for divorce or larger divorce settlement or in some cases criminal charges?

Criminal Adultery: States Ponder The Continuation of Puritanical Laws « JONATHAN TURLEY
 
ptif219 said:
So gays need rights but a man that wants multiple wives that hurts no one has no rights.
Click to expand...

I asked you a simple question...are you intellectually incapable of answering it? How does the number of marriage licenses a person is allowed to hold change as a result of allowing people of the same sex to marry?

If you can't answer that simple question then you are talking out of your ass by trying to compare the two. A state has a legitimate interest in limiting the number of marriage licenses any person can hold to one since it would by incredibly complicated, senseless, and completely unfair to allow people to hold more than one. Furthermore, it would serve no state interest to allow people to hold more than one license.
 
Last edited:
teamosil said:
Just FYI, this thread is a hoax. The pentagon just did a huge survey and found that the majority wanted gay people to serve openly in the military. Duh. How could anybody really believe that 95% of our soldiers were bigots? That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

:confused: thats not what i saw out of that poll; where are you getting that
 
95% of Marines are not 'comfortable' when serving in 155 degree heat either.......

What exactly is the point?

They don't get paid to be comfortable, they get paid to fight wars, support war fighters, and generally maintain the security of our nation.
 
roguenuke said:
How exactly can he use a legal contract of marriage to assert that his wife has final say in certain legal decisions if he has multiple wives from multiple legal contracts pretty much asserting the same thing? I say if a guy wants to live with several women and call them all "wife", fine. But the legal document of marriage essentially says that the other person in that contract with you has legal say on important matters affecting your life, say that is legally more important than anyone else in your life, including blood relatives. Therefore, if we were to have legal multi-marriages, there would have to be different rules established for settling such issues. Also, how do you settle the case if a man marries a woman who helps him get rich, then marries a second woman to father children for him, but the first woman wants to be able to marry another man as well, eventhough the man doesn't approve? If they decide to divorce over the issue, would she get half his money or a third? What if she was the one to make most of the money during the marriage, then he got married to another woman without her knowing? Would he still be entitled to half of her money or should he be considered committing adultery? What about states that still condemn adultery? Could being married to that other woman without the knowledge of a current wife be grounds for divorce or larger divorce settlement or in some cases criminal charges?

Criminal Adultery: States Ponder The Continuation of Puritanical Laws « JONATHAN TURLEY
Click to expand...

so some discrimination in your eyes is ok? Nice spin to show your bias
 
CriticalThought said:
I asked you a simple question...are you intellectually incapable of answering it? How does the number of marriage licenses a person is allowed to hold change as a result of allowing people of the same sex to marry?

If you can't answer that simple question then you are talking out of your ass by trying to compare the two. A state has a legitimate interest in limiting the number of marriage licenses any person can hold to one since it would by incredibly complicated, senseless, and completely unfair to allow people to hold more than one. Furthermore, it would serve no state interest to allow people to hold more than one license.
Click to expand...

Driscrimination. What is the state interest for gay marriage?
 
ptif219 said:
so some discrimination in your eyes is ok? Nice spin to show your bias
Click to expand...

The only spin is coming from you. Discrimination is allowable if the government has a legitimate reason to do so. You need to show the legitimate reason for discriminating against gays, whether it is the military or same sex marriage. I have given you a legitimate reason why the government can discriminate against people entering into multiple marriage contracts, so what is your legitimate reason for not allowing same sex couples to enter into marriage contracts? I, and others, have given you plenty of legitimate reasons for the military to discriminate against certain people when it comes to either not allowing them to serve or preventing them from serving in certain areas, so you need to provide legitimate reasons why gays shouldn't be allowed to serve or serve in certain areas.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Impersonating another member is an bannable offense
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Conservative_ said:
I just don't understand why someone's sexuality deems them as unworthy of being a soldier. I've always wanted to join the military to serve my country but have been hesitant to because of the anti-gay sentiment in the military and I was afraid if the truth about my homosexuality ever came out I'd be harrassed and kicked out. If DADT gets repealed I'm going to join and serve my country as an openly gay man.
Click to expand...
i may not see eye to eye with 'conservative', but this is sad, impersonating someone like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom