View Poll Results: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?

Voters
105. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, civil unions are an acceptable compromise.

    17 16.19%
  • No, they are not, because:

    55 52.38%
  • The government should not be involved with marriage, at all.

    25 23.81%
  • Other (Please Explain)

    8 7.62%
Page 15 of 83 FirstFirst ... 513141516172565 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 830

Thread: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

  1. #141
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    1.) maybe i will but your concern about it is meaningless to me i read your posts and interacted with you many times i dont need others or you to aknowledge it but maybe i will lol
    2.) sorry there is ZERO hyperbole in my post not am i trying to sound righteous, weird you seem upset about me "telling it like it is or i see it" when you claim you do the same
    3.) dont care what you think like i said i use facts logic and reason
    4.) 100% wrong since i never do this
    5.) again 100% wrong since i dont do this
    6.) more stuff i dont do
    7.) its fine you are against i believe you have that right and would protect you right to believe its wrong, try again
    8.) again never made such a claim
    9.) I agree i cant MAKE you one

    seems you have a lot of issues just randomly making stuff up and ranting, this post did nothing but let you vent hyperbole thats not happening, feel free to try again though

    by the way, still not mad at you lol
    Ahh, my long winded admirer... whatever it is you think matters naught to me.. Im not going to call you any names like a liar and im not really going to respond to your post...its mostly all jibberish and contrived nonesense....if you want to get at me you need to find another approach, this will never work ciao

  2. #142
    Advisor Just1Voice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Last Seen
    07-20-13 @ 12:15 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    389

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast View Post
    I believe your right...I believe the supreme court will side with SSM, I disagree that SSM will dictate what marriage is in the end and I believe the supreme court would never uphold the deletion of Bride and Groom and Wife and Husband.
    I would also like to say that my opinion not being for SSM is not based on religion and religion is not a factor in my being against it.
    When the supreme court agrees to SSM..I will not be upset, It will not bother me at all...wont affect me in any way.
    I am not on a crusade or a campaign to stop SSM...Im not voting for people just because they are against SSM like some vote for only those that are for it...I dont donate to anti SSM groups nor do I belong to any. You are either for something or not..Im merely not for reasons I really dont want to go throug for the 30th time.
    Actually you could be neither for nor against something. You could be apathetic about the whole issue. You are not apathetic, obviously, but your opinion is not enough to make any difference in the overall outcome. Regardless of the reasons for your position, it is simply wrong. Moreover it is on the wrong side of history. 20 years form now you will be ashamed to have ever held this position.

    Far more people are for marriage equality than against. Moreover, the Supreme Court will certainly be able to find reasons to rule DOMA unconstitutional without any difficulty. The appeal on the ruling of Prop 8 is a trickier proposition, but I think that the logic in the argument - that you cannot give equal rights to a group of people and then take it away after they begin to exercise them - is a sound one, and it will also be upheld in the end.

  3. #143
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,782

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast View Post
    Ahh, my long winded admirer... whatever it is you think matters naught to me.. Im not going to call you any names like a liar and im not really going to respond to your post...its mostly all jibberish and contrived nonesense....if you want to get at me you need to find another approach, this will never work ciao
    long winded? my post was smaller than yours LMAO
    also nobody here (or at least not me) is trying to "get at you" thats dumb, not even sure what that means, get at you how?
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  4. #144
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    long winded? my post was smaller than yours LMAO
    also nobody here (or at least not me) is trying to "get at you" thats dumb, not even sure what that means, get at you how?
    Do you know what ciao means ?

  5. #145
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,782

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    yep, very aware, why do i care though its your way of trying to dodge and deflect the mistakes you made

    tell me why you are against gay marriage?
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #146
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Just1Voice View Post
    Actually you could be neither for nor against something. You could be apathetic about the whole issue. You are not apathetic, obviously, but your opinion is not enough to make any difference in the overall outcome. Regardless of the reasons for your position, it is simply wrong. Moreover it is on the wrong side of history. 20 years form now you will be ashamed to have ever held this position.

    Far more people are for marriage equality than against. Moreover, the Supreme Court will certainly be able to find reasons to rule DOMA unconstitutional without any difficulty. The appeal on the ruling of Prop 8 is a trickier proposition, but I think that the logic in the argument - that you cannot give equal rights to a group of people and then take it away after they begin to exercise them - is a sound one, and it will also be upheld in the end.

    Yours is the kind of post with a tone that just flames the issue...your post is the reason that I post the way I do on this issue, most posts supporting SSM or ANYTHING GAY drips of sarcasm and goes downhill from there...your post drips with self righteous indignation and demeans my opinion and makes assumptions about me based on nothing...you totally disregarded everything I said in my post to you to just spew drivel...
    Lets break this down a little..


    You could be apathetic...why because you want me to ? I thought I had a mind of my own and free will.
    My opinion wont make a difference...I thought I had said that I believed the Supreme Court would rule in your favor
    Regardless of the reasons for your opinion.."YOUR SIMPLY WRONG" Oh am I...lol
    20 yrs I will be ashamed I had this position...doubtful young man or lady I will be dead.
    Your last paragraph is just repetitive...

    I could be apathetic...that means be against SSM and just STFU...umm no thank you.
    Your opinion wont make a difference...neither does yours to me and half the country.
    You are simply wrong...NO...YOU"RE WRONG...heh
    If Im alive in 20 yrs..Ill do what im doing right now today and did 20 yrs prior, make my own decision based on how I read the information, not based on how you view it.

    Ciao

  7. #147
    User
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    03-07-13 @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    96

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Another way to look at this is in term of sensitivity. The term marriage has been used by religion for centuries to imply the onlyhuman biological union that can procreate. This term is sacred to many, and homosexuals are not sensitive to their feelings. The feelings of the religious are being considered second rate by the PC dual standard.

    Their religious did not start this name calling, with gay marriage, violatin feelings as bad as an racial slur. The hurt feelings is why there is so much angry resistance. But since their feelings count for less they have to accept the abuse or be called bigots.

    Maybe the religious should hi-jack gay terms and give them meanings that create hurt in the the gay community so the gays get a feeling for the abuse they are causing. They may not be sensitive to anyone but themselves and therfore are bunch of biggots.

    I was playing the devils advocate to show the dual standard that exists, with PC abusing power. I believe in free speech and therefore we all should be able to insult or be considerate of each other equally. There should not be a dual standard.

  8. #148
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,782

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Well View Post
    Another way to look at this is in term of sensitivity. The term marriage has been used by religion for centuries to imply the onlyhuman biological union that can procreate. This term is sacred to many, and homosexuals are not sensitive to their feelings. The feelings of the religious are being considered second rate by the PC dual standard.

    Their religious did not start this name calling, with gay marriage, violatin feelings as bad as an racial slur. The hurt feelings is why there is so much angry resistance. But since their feelings count for less they have to accept the abuse or be called bigots.

    Maybe the religious should hi-jack gay terms and give them meanings that create hurt in the the gay community so the gays get a feeling for the abuse they are causing. They may not be sensitive to anyone but themselves and therfore are bunch of biggots.

    I was playing the devils advocate to show the dual standard that exists, with PC abusing power. I believe in free speech and therefore we all should be able to insult or be considerate of each other equally. There should not be a dual standard.
    guess its a good thing the way they(religious people) use the word marriage factually isnt affected or changing and never has too, there is no PC double standard as this has NOTHING to do with religion
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  9. #149
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Well View Post
    Another way to look at this is in term of sensitivity. The term marriage has been used by religion for centuries to imply the onlyhuman biological union that can procreate. This term is sacred to many, and homosexuals are not sensitive to their feelings. The feelings of the religious are being considered second rate by the PC dual standard.

    Their religious did not start this name calling, with gay marriage, violatin feelings as bad as an racial slur. The hurt feelings is why there is so much angry resistance. But since their feelings count for less they have to accept the abuse or be called bigots.

    Maybe the religious should hi-jack gay terms and give them meanings that create hurt in the the gay community so the gays get a feeling for the abuse they are causing. They may not be sensitive to anyone but themselves and therfore are bunch of biggots.

    I was playing the devils advocate to show the dual standard that exists, with PC abusing power. I believe in free speech and therefore we all should be able to insult or be considerate of each other equally. There should not be a dual standard.

    Great Post...but I would change one thing..its not only the religious that feel abused, its anyone that has an opposing view, religious or not.

    I fully understand that passion involved with this issue..I understand more than I get credit for, because it never comes out on here...
    We all have to understand that gays had a miserable existence for a long time..I KNOW THEY DID...they had to hide being gay out of fear of violence and ridicule...could any of us understand what in the closet really meant,I can only try...its like an Italian American having to dye his hair blonde and lose the guinney street slang, change his name from mario to Brian and tell everyone Im irish so they didnt kick his ass everyday or ...or spit on him and call him a Fin Italian scum worse tie him to a tree and beat him unmercifully or Kill him...thats what gays went through for generations, I KNOW THAT I saw it more than once.. Coming out was not only the right thing to do..they should have done it a long time ago...Now heres where I start to disagree. Even when your cause is genuinely just and being forceful when you have been kicked and treated like gays have is understandable and necessary to demand dignity and safety and rights no one can deny that..but there is a tipping point where being right in your demands, becomes trying to be dominant and dominate THOSE who dont share you view...then the role reverses and those that oppose feel they are the righteous and being besieged and they are defending themselves...the real problem is that straights dont understand all the passion and aggression behind the gay movement...and gays arent pausing and seeing how they are presenting their case now. There are so many factors that go into this it would take writing a book...
    One thing I can say from the straight perspective...that calling someone a bigot and calling them haters and hateful..when they say they are against SSM just makes them more against it.
    Yanno folks even when SSM becomes law..wouldnt it be nice if both sides got along after that happened.
    People that are against SSM and dont hate gays..and thats almost ALL the people I talk to that dont support SSM will accept it once it happens and that includes me..so why make it so bad before it happens that less will accept it...
    My last statment will be the most controversial...I truly believe that Gays and their supporters call others names..make wild insuations that they cant know are true about individuals they are far more sarcastic and abusive than the other side...and when people come off to me like that...I do the same in return when I really feel that way or not....

  10. #150
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    05-17-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,935

    re: Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

    Quote Originally Posted by Well View Post
    Another way to look at this is in term of sensitivity. The term marriage has been used by religion for centuries to imply the onlyhuman biological union that can procreate. This term is sacred to many, and homosexuals are not sensitive to their feelings. The feelings of the religious are being considered second rate by the PC dual standard.

    Their religious did not start this name calling, with gay marriage, violatin feelings as bad as an racial slur. The hurt feelings is why there is so much angry resistance. But since their feelings count for less they have to accept the abuse or be called bigots.

    Maybe the religious should hi-jack gay terms and give them meanings that create hurt in the the gay community so the gays get a feeling for the abuse they are causing. They may not be sensitive to anyone but themselves and therfore are bunch of biggots.

    I was playing the devils advocate to show the dual standard that exists, with PC abusing power. I believe in free speech and therefore we all should be able to insult or be considerate of each other equally. There should not be a dual standard.
    Here's the problem with this argument. Whether the religious people or anyone else who feels marriage should only be used to describe a certain thing has their feelings hurt by others, who don't fit into their personal definition of marriage is not something that should be a consideration at all when it comes to people's rights.

    Perhaps our forefathers should have used another word besides "marriage" when they started giving the recognition they did to couples as legal kin with certain legal rights and then benefits. But they didn't have the foresight to see the future. But right now the word marriage means many different things, and the meaning being fought over here has no religious or personal connotations to it. It is purely a legal contract. It comes with kinship recognition (which is not a gender specific thing) because here in the US we recognize blood/family relations with certain rights/benefits and a spouse is considered the closest person to another, benefits related to mainly the fact that you have two adults who are trying to entwine their lives around each other (again, not gender specific), protections for each of them should they decide (one or both) that the relationship needs to end (not gender specific), and responsibilities/rights for making decisions, basically combining many other contracts a person may draw up to cover themselves in future situations designating a specific person to have say for these decisions.

    Now, as far as the hijacking gay words thing goes, I'm just wondering how you were planning on doing that exactly. It seems pretty pointless honestly. Very few gays would get offended or their feelings hurt if you put different meanings to words that are considered "gay" words. I'm not even quite sure what a "gay word" would be.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

Page 15 of 83 FirstFirst ... 513141516172565 ... 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
  •