View Poll Results: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage?

Voters
170. You may not vote on this poll
  • Because Iím gay/lesbian

    3 1.76%
  • Because itís an equal rights issue

    93 54.71%
  • Because gays/lesbians love each other too

    8 4.71%
  • Because I despise bigots/haters

    2 1.18%
  • Because I donít want to be labeled a bigot

    1 0.59%
  • Iím opposed to gay marriage

    14 8.24%
  • I donít care, either way

    17 10.00%
  • Other

    32 18.82%
Page 41 of 71 FirstFirst ... 31394041424351 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 410 of 710

Thread: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

  1. #401
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    re: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    You mean like going contrary to the legal definition of marriage?
    It's not "contrary" to the definition. I suppose it would modify the "one man and one woman" part to just say two adults, but the rest of the definition would remain the same.

  2. #402
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    re: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    It's not "contrary" to the definition. I suppose it would modify the "one man and one woman" part to just say two adults, but the rest of the definition would remain the same.
    Then it's contrary to the definition, as the gender element is the primary reason for marriage.

  3. #403
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,796

    re: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    I asked first. Seeing how you've proven unable to keep your opinions to yourself, you get to answer on behalf of Dragonfly.

    Good luck.
    wow now you are just flat out lying, LMAO so predicitiable

    but ill go first because its easy

    legal marriage as ZERO stipulations, requirements, or laws that reference the need of children or participation in sexual intercourse

    DONE lol


    your turn, please provide factual evidence that this things matter to legal marriage, we are all waiting
    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. #404
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    07-08-14 @ 06:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,325

    re: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post
    wow now you are just flat out lying, LMAO
    Where's your proof? Now you've got two claims to prove. Seems your homework is starting to mount. I'd get busy if I were you.

  5. #405
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,796

    re: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Where's your proof? Now you've got two claims to prove. Seems your homework is starting to mount. I'd get busy if I were you.
    wow could you be anymore dishonest, its common knowledge, its a fact no matter how much you spin it

    but since you like to play games i have no problem making you look even more silly and proving your statement are 100% lies

    here a link for requirements in PA for a county, nothing about children or sexual intercourse
    Washington County Register of Wills, Washington Marriage License, PA

    you lose, you are 100% WRONG
    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. #406
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180

    re: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Then it's contrary to the definition, as the gender element is the primary reason for marriage.
    Can you provide a legal definition of marriage that delineates this (the bold)? It says it is between a man and woman, but it doesn't say that "gender is the primary reason for marriage."

  7. #407
    Sit Nomine Digna
    Carjosse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,190

    re: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Then it's contrary to the definition, as the gender element is the primary reason for marriage.
    So a mutual respect and love for each other is not the primary reason for marriage?

  8. #408
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

    re: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    Then it's contrary to the definition, as the gender element is the primary reason for marriage.
    If people have conflicting understandings of the reason for marriage, it is not up to the government to pick one and prohibit the rest. We don't need big brother telling us what our reasons for doing things are and ought to be.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  9. #409
    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: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dooble View Post
    And they were dead wrong.

    I'm curious. Why do you equate interracial marriage to gay marriage, when the former has zero control over its condition? Are you suggesting that ALL homosexuals are/were born gay?
    People don't choose to be in interracial relationships?
    "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.

  10. #410
    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: What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage? [W:539/549]

    This is the process for determining whether some law/restriction in law violates equal protection or not.

    First, the person/group who believes their rights are being violated challenges the law in court. Which court system it starts in depends on which level, federal or state, the law would being violating the guaranteed rights on. So if the right is being challenged under a violation of equal protection guaranteed by the 14th Amendment, it would go to federal court.

    In the case of equal protection, there are two parts. First, the court must determine if the people are actually being treated unequally under the law when compared to another, similarly situated group. Then, the state has to show why it is treating those groups "unequally", because they technically are legally allowed to do this as long as they are able to articulate why they are treating the groups differently, what state interest is being met in this unequal treatment and how exactly the unequal treatment actually meets the state interest being claimed to be furthered by it.

    This is why every case is different. This is why the Loving decision did not automatically legalize same sex marriage or strike down the law saying that those behind on their child support could not get married or that prisoners couldn't get married without warden approval. These laws had to be individually challenged and proven to the court as to why the state's argument did not hold water for upholding the interest they claimed it did.

    So then we go to each individual law that may be challenged pertaining to marriage and why they are all different. Allowing same sex couples to marry is different than allowing interracial couples to marry, not by much, but it is different. So it had to be challenged. Just as the child support/marriage law was (Zablocki v Redhail). Just as the prisoners needing warden permission was (Turner v Safley). I absolutely believe that polygamy laws will be challenged again, as they have been in the past. But they still would need to be challenged. Incest laws will likely be challenged, although it is likely they would only be challenged for specific relations, not to totally abolish these restrictions.

    Once challenged, the state can make its arguments for why the restrictions are within the interest of the state, furthering a state interest. These are where the biggest differences will lie. Many people are treated unequally by laws but they don't make it far in the courts if to them at all because lawyers and judges know that the state's argument for why the unequal treatment is needed will be good enough.

    Whether right or wrong in the past, we have reached the point where same sex relationships are legal and the state's arguments for keeping them from entering into marriage cannot be supported as actually furthering a state interest. With divorce, alternative methods of procreation, childless couples at a level in the US of 25%, DNA tests to keep children from being "bastards", remarriage, birth control, equal treatment of the sexes, and many other things that have changed in the last 40 years, it can really no longer be supported that marriage is for children, whether it was about children in the past or not. The religious/moral argument doesn't work. And even the Congressional Budget Committee has done a study that determined that same sex couples being allowed to marry would likely benefit the government budget, not harm it. You cannot prove "harm to society" and same sex couples being together does not harm those individuals or anyone else.

    If we look at the other "groups" that may be treated unequally as far as marriage goes, the arguments for why restricting them would be different than those concerning same sex restrictions. Multiple spouses would cause major legal issues. Whether that should be enough to restrict them or not, would need to be decided elsewhere. Personally it is enough for me and it is a reasonable argument that would not apply to the current number limit, one spouse per person. Whether an immigrant spouse is male or female, black, white, red, or blue, it would still be just one person for the government to look into for each person trying to marry them (one example of legal/financial hardship on government for multiple spouses). It becomes a hardship for society though to check to ensure these couples are not committing fraud when we are talking 4, 10, 40 spouses, and we have already determined that it is important to society that these marriages should be checked out to ensure the people are not getting paid to get their "spouse" citizenship. If such a reasonable argument exists on a personal level for same sex marriage for individual people, fine, oppose same sex marriage for that grounds, but it shouldn't be because of why others might or might not support other types of marriage. But don't expect the Courts to agree with you. If they don't agree with me, I'm willing to accept that. But something like polygamy shouldn't be legal just because same sex marriage gets made legal. Incest too has its own arguments against it. Now, I don't think those arguments are strong enough when it comes to first cousins not being allowed to marry, but are when it comes to closer relations not being allowed to marry.
    "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 41 of 71 FirstFirst ... 31394041424351 ... 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
  •