View Poll Results: Same-sex marriage is wrong because

Voters
113. You may not vote on this poll
  • It isn't, and should be available to all gay couples

    77 68.14%
  • Being gay is wrong, so they can't get married

    16 14.16%
  • The sanctity of marriage. No, I wasn't laughing. I was coughing. *cough* ... see?

    4 3.54%
  • It will set a bad example for Christian youth

    0 0%
  • I don't honestly have a good reason, but I still say no

    1 0.88%
  • Other (please explain)

    15 13.27%
Page 120 of 158 FirstFirst ... 2070110118119120121122130 ... LastLast
Results 1,191 to 1,200 of 1577

Thread: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

  1. #1191
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,490

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    I don't beleive that to be true. Limits on pornography, sex, explicit lyrics, etc, say otherwise.
    Obscenity laws aren't based on individuals who may be offended. They are governed by "community standards".

    Access to Internet porno is uncontrollable despite the warning disclaimers. Up to parents to install programs to block assess. So, I'm not sure what limits you're talking about.

    Music has as an age appropriate rating on the cover. But kids purchase whatever they want on the Internet.

    Not sure what you're talking about when you say " Limitations on sex".

  2. #1192
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Slippery slope is not a legitimate argument, or not one that holds a lot of water. I find it funny that people like you point to the "domino" effect here. Yet did you point to the potential Domino Effect and speak so worriedly about it when we moved from a nationa agenda of defensive to pre-emptive offensive in regards ot foreign policy? Did you and mac go on and on about the potential "Domino Effect" of the Patriot Act? The potential "Domino Effect" of allowing "enhanced" interrogation actions? The potential "domino effect" of having out of country prisons that are not subject to the US constitution? And on and on...
    I did and do have problems with the patriot act and have had these issues with many of our foreign policy actions, yes.

    Or do you just care about the "Domino Effect" on issues you don't agree with, and thus need an extra excuse to argue against them? Why is it that the "Domino Effect" seemingly only exists in cases of things people dislike?

    Support for Gay Marriage or unions of some kind is at the very least right around the 50% market. I dare say far higher than the mark for people agreeing with the notion of people walking around nude wherever they please. Not to mention that one does not directly correlate to the other so trying to argue against one because it may somehow, someway, potentially, lead to a thought process that might, potentially, possibly, in some way lead to the other happening. Its ridiculous and on par with saying we shouldn't reform Medicare in any way because it could lead to use stripping all veterans of any form of insurance due to the "domino effect".

    People have such a hard problem actually finding and presenting legitimate fault in THIS argument that they have to reach for hypotheticals that are absolutely unprovable and unknowable and attempt to argue against those things as a means of trying to discredit the issue at hand. "If this happens it may cause a thought process that might possibly lead to x happening" is not a good argument against the initial thing, unless a distinct, measurable, realistic expectation of the latter possabilities can actually be presented. That's not the case here.
    Being unprovable or unknowable doesn't mean they won't occur.

    I find it hillarious that Mac speaks about the "will of the people" and how "important" it is...and yet, with poll after poll showing more and more support for gay marriage, I somehow doubt that when 51% of "the people" show that their "will" is for its legalization that Mac would be sitting there saying "Well, its important we follow the Will of the people so make it legal".
    I have said that society has the right to regulate its own behaviors and that if it is the will of the people to allow SSM then so be it. I'll go on with my life. However, as one of the people, I reserve my right to weigh in on how our laws are passed be that in favor or opposed. There are plenty of existing laws I oppose, not just aspects of marriage law....I'm still living.

    Maybe someday there will be some big movement to allow people to bang wherever they want. That said, there's no such movement now. There's no significant public support for it now. There's not even as sound of constitutional arguments in favor of it as there is in regards to gay marriage. So attempting to use that as a shield for why we shouldn't legalize gay marriage is a bit ridiculous.
    There are those of us in this society that are concerned with it's moral welfare, regardless of whether or not you think that is a legitimate concern. The domino effect, if you want to call it that has happened as a result of many civil rights laws that I'll agree were absolutely necessary changes, but did have some negative effects.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  3. #1193
    ˇSelah!
    Alyssa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    southern and midwestern United States where Protestant fundamentalism is dominant
    Last Seen
    05-07-14 @ 09:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,648
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    It's amusing to me when people give examples of pedophilia and incest, and then try to compare that to gay marriage.
    “In politics, stupidity is not a handicap.” -Napoleon

  4. #1194
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Marriage is already no longer about family.
    Therefore the government has no business being involved any longer.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  5. #1195
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by evanescence View Post
    It's amusing to me when people give examples of pedophilia and incest, and then try to compare that to gay marriage.
    it's amusing to me that those who bleat "consenting adults" in regards to gay marriage go "icky" when it comes to consenting adults in regards to incest.

    man ****s man = ok
    man ****s female cousin = icky

    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  6. #1196
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Legally, you are able to. Your inability to marry everyone you are attracted to is not limited by the law, but rather personal and social factors.

    That is, unless you are attracted to a child or a minor.
    No, I cannot legally marry everyone I am attracted to...just one person I am attracted too.
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  7. #1197
    Sage
    mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    DC Metro
    Last Seen
    11-13-16 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    22,499

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by BDBoop View Post
    Mac, why can't you? I'm assuming because 1) you're already married, and 2) attraction is not mutual. But if both parties want to get married and they are both free to do so, they should have that right.
    I am allready married...and I'm only allowed one (at a time).
    ”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.” --- Ben Franklin

    Quote Originally Posted by The German View Post
    Sterotypes are mostly based on truths.

  8. #1198
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    No, I cannot legally marry everyone I am attracted to...just one person I am attracted too.
    well for the most part, gays can't even do that.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  9. #1199
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    it's amusing to me that those who bleat "consenting adults" in regards to gay marriage go "icky" when it comes to consenting adults in regards to incest.

    man ****s man = ok
    man ****s female cousin = icky

    Each stands on their own regardless of how anyone feels. I would say man with sister would be more icky, but regardless, each stands on its own. If there is no just cause, neither should be banned. The critieria should not be icky, but just cause.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  10. #1200
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: SSM (Same-sex marriage) is wrong because?

    From wiki:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inbreed..._to_inbreeding

    The taboo of incest has been discussed by many social scientists. Anthropologists attest that it exists in most cultures. As inbreeding within the first generation often produces expression of recessive traits, the prohibition has been discussed as a possible functional response to the requirement of culling those born deformed, or with undesirable traits.[citation needed] Some biologists like Charles Davenport advocated traditional forms of assortative breeding, i.e., eugenics, to form better "human stock".

    In discussing humans, the term inbreeding is often considered highly offensive and judgmental.[citation needed] However, such marriages are not illegal in most of the world. Although it is an undisputed fact that cousin marriages increase the probability of genetic disease, the level of statistical increase varies with the degree of relationship, and the frequency of the marriages. The casual use of the term inbred implies that some degree of degradation exists, when in fact there may be no effect at all.
    Some Hindus follow the Gotra system, which prescribes prohibition of marriages among relatives based on a name attached to paternal relatives, to prevent inbreeding. Direct inbreeding is also prohibited in Islam, as described in the Quran (chapter 4, verse 23).
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •