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 122 of 158 FirstFirst ... 2272112120121122123124132 ... LastLast
Results 1,211 to 1,220 of 1577

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

  1. #1211
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,994

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Therefore the government has no business being involved any longer.
    I actually don't have a huge disagreement with you here, except for the fact I do think there's legitimate interest in regards to the government in recognizing someone whose your defacto joint individual in matters of estate and power of attorny and other such things without requiring one to go through every various document. And also benefit in regards to streamlining the system...for the government and the individual...with regards to individuals sharing property and income when it comes to taxes and other things regarding it.

  2. #1212
    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 theplaydrive View Post
    Just like neither blacks nor whites was allowed to marry outside their race. What's the difference?
    Mainly, race is a false concept. Other than that, only whites and blacks were consistently discriminated against...other pairings were usually allowed.
    ”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. #1213
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,994

    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

    Strangely enough, I don't have a huge issue with incest as a point of law. On a personal level, sure. But I don't think we necessarily need laws against it. I don't think it'd be common. And I think women getting married and having kids over the age of 40 would be far more common and has a chance to affect the child negatively, much like incest does, and we allow for that. So I don't really feel its a just law.

    That said, because it also does affect far fewer people imho then its not as big of an issue to debate about.

  4. #1214
    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
    Strangely enough, I don't have a huge issue with incest as a point of law. On a personal level, sure. But I don't think we necessarily need laws against it. I don't think it'd be common. And I think women getting married and having kids over the age of 40 would be far more common and has a chance to affect the child negatively, much like incest does, and we allow for that. So I don't really feel its a just law.

    That said, because it also does affect far fewer people imho then its not as big of an issue to debate about.
    Have you been to West Virginia?
    ”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. #1215
    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
    Mainly, race is a false concept. Other than that, only whites and blacks were consistently discriminated against...other pairings were usually allowed.
    I don't think "false concept" is a term that properly describes it.

    Sociologists say that race is a social construct. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that there aren't real-world consequences stemming from categorizing people into different races.
    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

  6. #1216
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    11-17-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,610

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Mainly, race is a false concept. Other than that, only whites and blacks were consistently discriminated against...other pairings were usually allowed.
    What do "false concepts" and "consistency" have to do with discrimination? Nothing.

    Whites and blacks were equally discriminated against just like men and women are equally discriminated against now. Whites had a right blacks didn't have and blacks had a right whites didn't have. Men have a right women don't have and women have a right men don't have. Nothing you said contradicts this reality.

  7. #1217
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,994

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    They do, neither sex is allowed to marry within it's gender. It would be discrimination (imo) if men were allowed to marry men but women were not allowed to marry women.

    And a man can't marry a man. Equal treatment.
    Equal discrimination doesn't make it any less discrimination.

    When looking at specifics, a man can do something a woman can't and vise versa based singularly on their gender.

    It only appears that they are able to do the "same thing" when one uses generalized terms such as "within their gender" or "the opposite sex" rather than the SPECIFIC terms of the situation which is a man can marry a woman, but a woman can not marry a woman.

    Looking for something that sticks? That is not similar in my opinion, but I'll have to think on it awhile to best articulate why. I'll get back to this question.
    No, I'm illustrating the difference between specific and generalized description of groups and showing how one can use the more generalized description in an effort to hide the inequality that's occur.

    "Both blacks and whites can use water fountains" is a generalized thing. Rather than speaking about specifics, you're talking about their ability to use water fountains in general. However when you get to the specifics you see that "Blacks can use water fountains designated for blacks, and whites can use water fountains designated for whites".

    By being generalized you could say "Both are able to use water fountains that are for their same race, so they're equal in that they both can do the same thing". However, when you look at the specifics, you see its not the case.

    Same thing in the analogy I gave you.

    "Opposite View of the Existance of God" is attempting to generalize the issue in hopes of hiding the fact that religious people can do something athiests can't, and vise versa, based singularly on what their religious view is.

    What you, and others, are doing by constantly going "opposite sex" or "same sex" rather than dealing directly with the specifics of what each gender can do is using the generalization of the situation to hide the specific cases of descrimination. What it is is no different than suggesting that blacks and whites can both use their same-race approved water fountains, so they have equal rights. That suggesting it'd be constitutional to ban religious people from marrying athiests and vise versa because they both have the oppertunity to marry someone of the "opposite religious view on the existance of god" and therefore its equal.

    You mentioned you could kind of see it as a seperate but equal situation. And you know what, I can see that. However, "seperate but equal" is a FORM of discrimination so even if you're going with that we're not really far off on this.

    At best, its a "seperate but equal" form of gender discrimination where we say women can marry one gender and men can marry one gender and even though they can't marry the same gender that the other person can, its equal so its okay.

    At worst, its full on standard fare gender discrimination where we're saying one gender can't do something another gender can based singularly on the gender group they apply to.

    In either case, its potentially unconstitutional discrimination depending on how it holds up to the EPC requirements for gender.

  8. #1218
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,994

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mac View Post
    Have you been to West Virginia?
    A number of times. Best Snowboarding, Strip Clubs, and Gambling in the immediete area

  9. #1219
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,526

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

    Those against Gay Marriage: Arguments built around individual beliefs are MOOT, unless their arguments "includes" empirical evidence that society (then entire nation) is or will suffer significant adversities to our daily lives, reduce the nation's overall well being, and damage the ability to function as a society...etc.

    I don't care about individual beliefs in a matter such as this. This is about a PRIVATE and consensual relationships that's just nobody's ***** business.

    Gay marriage has ZERO effects on my life. And I very certain the same will be opinions of my family members and friends.

    3 percent of the population that are gay...will not destroy, injure, or significant change, for the worse, the social fabric of this nation.

  10. #1220
    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 Zyphlin View Post
    That said, because it also does affect far fewer people imho then its not as big of an issue to debate about.
    using that logic, only about 3% of the population is gay and not all of them want to get married, so there are really very few people that gay marriage personally affects. so why the big debate over an issue that affects only a small, small # of people?
    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.

Posting Permissions

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