View Poll Results: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homophobe

Voters
101. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    24 23.76%
  • No

    77 76.24%
Page 33 of 44 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 432

Thread: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homophobe

  1. #321
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    08-07-12 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    216

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Yes, you do. Show me where either the state initiative or the state referendum process was used to attempt either.



    That's exactly what I'm saying. Neither process is designed to circumvent the FEDERAL constitution.



    Which claims are you referring to? The debunked crap about polling being more accurate than actual voting results? That's already been provided for you. And btw, this little detour into the referendum and initiative processes doesn't help your point at all. Besides showing you have little knowledge of either (still haven't looked up the difference have you?), still confirms that the people, at the voting booth are against SSM in great number.
    Woman Suffrage in Oregon | Oregon Encyclopedia - Oregon History and Culture

    Since you were bragging about the history of the Oregon System and like to tell people to bone up on their history, I would have assumed you were familiar with your own history. Not only was it attempted several times and eventually passed (before the 19th Amendment) in Oregon, but the same process happened in several other states with the initiative process. I can document every single time it was attempted, and every single time it was successful in the history of the state initiative process, if you'd like. But I assumed I just need to prove you wrong on the point--although I'm sure you'll keep carping about how little I know about the history of state initiatives and referendums, even though you've just made a demonstrably false claim. As for the circumventing, you're hung up on the semantics. I didn't say that state initiatives were treasonous and their supporters should be tortured to death. What I said is that they provide a way around the state legislatures' power of legislation, just as "activist judges" do.

    The problem that you never addressed is that you claim scientific polls from 2012 aren't valid, because of electoral results from four years ago. You seem to think the idea that anyone in this country might have changed their minds in the past 4 years, about one of the hottest issues out there, is crazy. You intentionally ignore the fact that up to or even more than half of the people polled in the polls I reference aren't going to vote in this election. That's called a confounding variable in statistics, something you should familiarize yourself with before you make more absurd allegations. You made an attempt to provide evidence with anecdotal crap about "folks you know in California," but you failed to demonstrate why that is more valid than scientific polling. You haven't provided any evidence for anything you've argued, and you've rejected my evidence based on your personal feelings and anecdotal examples. The detour into referendums and initiatives, by the way, was me replying to someone else. You jumped on the thread, trying to prove me wrong, but I hope we can get back on the actual point of the thread.
    Last edited by Miguel17; 08-06-12 at 10:27 PM.

  2. #322
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    Quote Originally Posted by Miguel17 View Post
    Woman Suffrage in Oregon | Oregon Encyclopedia - Oregon History and Culture

    Since you were bragging about the history of the Oregon System and like to tell people to bone up on their history, I would have assumed you were familiar with your own history. Not only was it attempted several times and eventually passed (before the 19th Amendment) in Oregon, but the same process happened in several other states with the initiative process. I can document every single time it was attempted, and every single time it was successful in the history of the state initiative process, if you'd like. But I assumed I just need to prove you wrong on the point--although I'm sure you'll keep carping about how little I know about the history of state initiatives and referendums.
    First, you are correct, that we did try to change the STATE constitution to allow women the vote in LOCAL and STATE elections. That was my error. Your error is in thinking that either process has anything to do with FEDERAL law or constitution.

    You've gone on to blast the processes as being inconsistent with the FEDERAL constitution. Your argument almost flies with the initiative process, but absolutely fails on the referendum process (where the legislature writes the law and then puts it up for public vote).

    Quote Originally Posted by Miguel17 View Post
    The problem that you never addressed is that you claim scientific polls from 2012 aren't valid, because of electoral results from four years ago. You intentionally ignore the fact that up to or even more than half of the people polled in the polls I reference aren't going to vote in this election. That's called a confounding variable in statistics, something you should familiarize yourself with before you make more absurd allegations. You made an attempt to provide evidence with anecdotal crap about "folks you know in California," but you failed to demonstrate why that is more valid than scientific polling. You haven't provided any evidence for anything you've argued, and you've rejected my evidence based on your personal feelings and anecdotal examples. The detour into referendums and initiatives, by the way, was me replying to someone else. You jumped on the thread, trying to prove me wrong, but I hope we can get back on the actual point of the thread.
    Opinion polls are not facts, not in 2008 and not in 2012. And it's you who have ignored that a good number of those polled may not vote in whatever upcoming election. There is no "scientific evidence" that polling is more reflective of people's personal opinions than the result of a vote. You can't prove it, and I can't "prove" the negative. At least not by scientific standards. However, I "demonstrated" the point quite nicely by showing you the reality of the result garnered by the majority (of the voters to be sure, but that's the only majority that counts in this discussion).

    Since you claim such a close knowledge of the initiative and referendum processes, please tell us, how many are on the ballot for 2012 looking to legalize SSM? Certainly if the majority that you claim through opinion polls is so for this, well, where are the initiatives, where are the referendums?

    It's been a few dozen years since I had my last stats course, but I work with stats all the time in real life. Don't go trying to teach yer grandma how to suck eggs.
    Last edited by clownboy; 08-06-12 at 10:38 PM.

  3. #323
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    Quote Originally Posted by Miguel17 View Post
    You're acting as though only the tiny minority of homosexuals are relevant to the debate. But quite obviously, most people who support SSM are not gay and are supporting it on moral grounds. Next, you pretend that what matters is comparing the numerical amount of homosexuals who want to redefine marriage to the people who don't, but that's a false comparison and is irrelevant. Then you act as though including SSM in the definition of marriage is wrong because the number of people who don't support SSM is greater than the homosexual population that does, even though you're ignoring the obvious and overriding fact that the majority of people in this country support SSM, even if they're straight. That means that, your irrelevant subset notwithstanding, more people will be happy with legalizing SSM than will be pissed off about it. You don't have a moral reason for opposing SSM, nor a legal reason, and even the public is not on your side anymore; so you have to make up the irrelevant arithmetic of "homosexuals approving of SSM" and "people who would be pissed off by SSM" and pretend that it's an argument.
    Now you're simply obfuscating again, likely over-reacting to be called on your error of comparison.

    Your arguments here rely on a redefinition of the word marriage already having happened, which it hasn't and thus you're preseting out of time context, as everytime you use the term "SSM" you're utilizing an oxymoron, as by actual definition of the word "marriage", there is no such thing as same-sex marriage.

    Thus your paragraph here is a form of sophistry, an absurding of illogic.


    Quote Originally Posted by Miguel17 View Post
    Not to mention the fact that the logic of your argument would fail you if applied to, say interracial marriage. After all, when interracial marriage was legalized throughout the nation in 1967, the subset of blacks and whites who would enjoy the benefits of getting married was minuscule, compared to the much larger segment of the population that was pissed off by it. Do you stand by the logical corollary of your argument; that blacks and whites should have fought for a state-by-state recognition of interracial civil unions without being marriage?
    Your implied analogy is baseless, as the reasons for the unjustified exclusions you cite had nothing to do with marriage being "between a man and a woman as huband and wife".

    Those exclusions were not made by appeal to definition but by appeal to bigotry, bigotry that by definition of the word "marriage" simply does not apply in this thread-topical case.


    Quote Originally Posted by Miguel17 View Post
    You seem convinced that homarriage civil union domestic partnerships is a win-win.
    Absolutely it is.

    Homosexuals get equality socioeconomically and geopolitically in their relationship with the state which is their bottom line goal.

    And marriage remains what its members have always known and cherish it to be "between a man and a woman as husband and wife", their bottom line goal.

    Everybody wins.


    Quote Originally Posted by Miguel17 View Post
    I don't know how many different ways to tell you the same thing, but it's only a win to your side. Do you understand that?
    Absolutely false.

    It's a win-win, a win for both sides.

    If you're bellyaching about homosexuals not being able to call their civil union domestic partnerships "marriage", who cares? They don't.

    All they care about is getting that recognized equal treatment with the state, really; that was the sole reason for all the "movement" that's led to the ludicrous tack "gay marriage" activists are now taking. Had homarriage already existed, none of this would have ever escalated into the nonsense it currently is.

    The only reason, a truly irrational one, that some people think that if homosexuals don't get to use the word "marriage" that it's "biased and unfair" is because rabble rousing "gay marriage" activist instigators have got them all worked up into a mind-controlled frenzy for the purpose of herding them all quickly in the short-cut direction of redefining the word marriage.

    Seriously, get a foothold in reality.

    This is really all very easy to understand.

    I think you've been operating out of time and definition context for so long you've kind of brainwashed yourself into thinking things that simply do not exist.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

  4. #324
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    08-07-12 @ 12:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    216

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    First, you are correct, that we did try to change the STATE constitution to allow women the vote in LOCAL and STATE elections. That was my error. Your error is in thinking that either process has anything to do with FEDERAL law or constitution.

    You've gone on to blast the processes as being inconsistent with the FEDERAL constitution. Your argument almost flies with the initiative process, but absolutely fails on the referendum process (where the legislature writes the law and then puts it up for public vote).



    Opinion polls are not facts, not in 2008 and not in 2012. And it's you who have ignored that a good number of those polled may not vote in whatever upcoming election. There is no "scientific evidence" that polling is more reflective of people's personal opinions than the result of a vote. You can't prove it, and I can't "prove" the negative. At least not by scientific standards. However, I "demonstrated" the point quite nicely by showing you the reality of the result garnered by the majority (of the voters to be sure, but that's the only majority that counts in this discussion).

    Since you claim such a close knowledge of the initiative and referendum processes, please tell us, how many are on the ballot for 2012 looking to legalize SSM? Certainly if the majority that you claim through opinion polls is so for this, well, where are the initiatives, where are the referendums?

    It's been a few dozen years since I had my last stats course, but I work with stats all the time in real life. Don't go trying to teach yer grandma how to suck eggs.
    I don't know how to put this to you differently. I'm well aware that state initiatives don't change federal law. I never implied that. What I said is that they are a way of getting around federal constitutionally established obstacles, like the vote of state legislatures. It's as simple as that. I didn't say they are inconsistent with the federal consititon. I'm not saying they're unconstitutional. All I'm saying is they get around the state legislatures. We've been debating for half an hour about the definition of one word.

    I think that evidence from 2012 is probably more representative of the facts in 2012 than evidence from 2008. I'm not arguing for the primacy of opinion polls over electoral results. I'm representing the obvious fact that what was true four years ago (certain proportions of the population opposing SSM) may well have changed in the past four years since.

    I never claimed a "close knowledge" of the state initiative process, that's a straw man. I merely took issue with your claim about how ignorant I am about them. Do you understand the difference? If I say that I'm not completely ignorant about football, I'm not saying that I'm #1 on Aaron Rodgers' speed dial. I hate to get so didactic, but I want to make sure you understand where you went wrong on the straw man fallacy.

    As far as I know (I'm not claiming omniscience here), SSM will be on the ballot in four states. I don't know if they will pass. They may not, but that wouldn't prove me wrong. As I've said before, there is almost a direct correlation between increasing age and increasing opposition to SSM; in other words, the opponents are older and dying off, and the supporters are gaining more and more footholds as they age into voter eligibility and get involved.

    By the way, I may be young, but work with history everyday in real life. So take your own advice.

  5. #325
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    64 to 13 (4 anonymous votes for yes which don't count).....I have to say I am really impresed...........Kind of restores your faith in DP.
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  6. #326
    Sage
    Ontologuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,516

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    64 to 13 (4 anonymous votes for yes which don't count).....I have to say I am really impresed...........Kind of restores your faith in DP.
    Heh heh.

    Well, as you surely know, the way your question is phrased, a "no" answer does not mean one opposes "gay marriage", it just means, as worded, one's own preference is for "traditional marriage", and dosn't say anthing at all about that "no"-voter's either support or opposition for "gay marriage".

    I think that's the reason you got so many "no" votes.
    Last edited by Ontologuy; 08-07-12 at 03:47 AM.
    You don't trust Trump? Well, there's only one way to leverage him to do what's economically right for us all: Powerful American Political Alliance. Got courage?! .. and a mere $5.00?

  7. #327
    Sage
    Lovebug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,884

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    So really, if anyone states that the person (group) who disagrees with his/her opinion is a bigot sets a prime example of a bigot...by true definition. Right?
    IOW, all those on the right are bigots for speaking out against....._____________fill in the blank.
    Finger pointing at its finest once again. Lets not be tolerant ourselves, but rather point out how intolerant we think others are.
    Got it.

  8. #328
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    Marriage isn't really "marriage" anymore. Today, it's little more than a legal agreement. People really should stop calling it "marriage" altogether.
    If you consider what was called marriage historically you could apply your "Marriage isn't really "marriage" anymore ..." many times. An you specific point "it's little more than a legal agreement." has been effectively correct when, for example, the church that was in control of the area was the source of what was legal.
    When we got married 30+ years ago, we were the significant source of what our marriage was going to be; and, we registered with the state since it met the requirements. It should be as bottom up and open as it rationally can be when it's registered with the state. Whatever is required by a church is extra. And if the parties want to add 'extra' stuff they get it written up and signed with a lawyer.

  9. #329
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    64 to 13 (4 anonymous votes for yes which don't count).....I have to say I am really impresed...........Kind of restores your faith in DP.
    64 thinks it makes a homophobe or a bigot . . . the others do not.

    I thought you would see it the opposite; that so many people having a negative view of his 'traditional favoritism' as a bad thing because they're supporting SSM - not opposing it.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  10. #330
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homop

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    64 to 13 (4 anonymous votes for yes which don't count).....I have to say I am really impresed...........Kind of restores your faith in DP.
    Yup. The question was "If a man states I favor tradiional marriage does that make him a bigot or a homophobe"? And no is my vote. As far as I'm concerned our marriage is just the traditional marriage I wanted, and I want to let all others make the same commitment, gay or what ever. My faith in people was restored too.
    (Did I get the intent of this poll correct?)
    Last edited by OhIsee.Then; 08-07-12 at 12:40 PM.

Page 33 of 44 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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