• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

What is the primary reason behind your support for same-sex marriage?

  • Because I’m gay/lesbian

    Votes: 3 2.2%
  • Because it’s an equal rights issue

    Votes: 78 57.4%
  • Because gays/lesbians love each other too

    Votes: 6 4.4%
  • Because I despise bigots/haters

    Votes: 1 0.7%
  • Because I don’t want to be labeled a bigot

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I’m opposed to gay marriage

    Votes: 13 9.6%
  • I don’t care, either way

    Votes: 16 11.8%
  • Other

    Votes: 19 14.0%

  • Total voters
    136
  • Poll closed .
For the same reason that we curtail rampant drug use. It's not obvious why?

ridiculous hyperbole. it's not like if we were to allow incest marriage there would be millions of brothers and sisters rushing to get married. you squeal and moan about comparing SSM to incest and then turn around and compare incest to rampant drug use. I'll use your own words against you... :2bigcry: they are not the same thing :2bigcry:



Huh? Do you always rely on fabrications of your own design that no one ever argued but yourself? No one is stopping an unwed mother from keeping her kids that she can't support. No one ever argued that she shouldn't be allowed. What the FRACK are you talking about?

huh? don't blame me for your lack of reading comprehension skill. I never said anything about taking anyone's kids. only preventing them from producing more when they can't even support the ones they already have. you apparently have no problem allowing unwed mothers to continually burden society with supporting kid after kid yet you piss yourself over the possibility that a brother and sister MIGHT have a tarded baby that they MIGHT not be able to support.



It's the rampant hyperbole and poorly executed fabrications of those against SSM in tying it to completely unrelated issues.


there's that knee jerk idiocy and lack of reading skill again.... in case you haven't been actually reading my posts...I am not against SSM.
 
Simply because I don't believe in looking down upon people who don't share my same sexual orientation.
 
Those against SSM are bigots... simply put.
 
Those against SSM are bigots... simply put.
As a SSM supporter that understands the arguments of both sides I can't agree with you. Surely there are some who oppose SSM that are bigots! There are also people opposed to it that are not. In fact there are even some members of the gay community that are opposed to "it" and it is not because they are bigots. IMO just labeling people bigots is part of the problem.
 
As a SSM supporter that understands the arguments of both sides I can't agree with you. Surely there are some who oppose SSM that are bigots! There are also people opposed to it that are not. In fact there are even some members of the gay community that are opposed to "it" and it is not because they are bigots. IMO just labeling people bigots is part of the problem.

I disagree... I know women that are anti-equal rights. They are sexists against themselves. That is not a valid argument.

Those against SSM ARE bigots. It might be subconscious ignorance... but it is bigotry none the less.
 
I disagree... I know women that are anti-equal rights. They are sexists against themselves. That is not a valid argument.

Those against SSM ARE bigots. It might be subconscious ignorance... but it is bigotry none the less.
OK. Then I'd have to say what is your definition of bigotry? How does it fit the members of the gay community who are also opposed to SSM also? They say it is based upon a principal. Just curious and of course knowing some folks who are opposed to SSM but are all for "civil unions" or some similar means to the same end (and knowing they are not bigots and don't fit the definition) makes it hard to lend much credence to that claim.
 
As a SSM supporter that understands the arguments of both sides I can't agree with you. Surely there are some who oppose SSM that are bigots! There are also people opposed to it that are not. In fact there are even some members of the gay community that are opposed to "it" and it is not because they are bigots. IMO just labeling people bigots is part of the problem.
But that's exactly what they are, they are advocates of using government force to limit the rights of a certain group. If I said "I don't think black people should marry because I've defined marriage as a union between two white people.", would it really matter what my reason was for saying that?

No, I'd be a racist POS for saying that, just as all anti-SSM supporters are bigots.
 
OK. Then I'd have to say what is your definition of bigotry? How does it fit the members of the gay community who are also opposed to SSM also? They say it is based upon a principal. Just curious and of course knowing some folks who are opposed to SSM but are all for "civil unions" or some similar means to the same end (and knowing they are not bigots and don't fit the definition) makes it hard to lend much credence to that claim.

My definition is the commonly used one...

Definition of BIGOT
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance


Bigot - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Principle?? Principle...

If you can show why gays can't be bigots against their own or why women can't be sexist against their own I would think that you would be a world leading psychologist. Are you?
 
But that's exactly what they are, they are advocates of using government force to limit the rights of a certain group. If I said "I don't think black people should marry because I've defined marriage as a union between two white people.", would it really matter what my reason was for saying that?

No, I'd be a racist POS for saying that, just as all anti-SSM supporters are bigots.
The members of the gay community that are opposed to SSM marriage, based as they say on a principal, they are bigots?
 
But that's exactly what they are, they are advocates of using government force to limit the rights of a certain group. If I said "I don't think black people should marry because I've defined marriage as a union between two white people.", would it really matter what my reason was for saying that?

No, I'd be a racist POS for saying that, just as all anti-SSM supporters are bigots.

What this ****ing guy said,...
 
The members of the gay community that are opposed to SSM marriage, based as they say on a principal, they are bigots?

Of course they are...
 
My definition is the commonly used one...

Definition of BIGOT
: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance


Bigot - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Principle?? Principle...

If you can show why gays can't be bigots against their own or why women can't be sexist against their own I would think that you would be a world leading psychologist. Are you?
Sorry you don't need to be a world leading psychologist to know that people who are opposed to SSM but are all for an alternate form of achieving the same means are hardly "obstinate or intolerant" much less bigots. Just saying.:shrug:
 
Sorry you don't need to be a world leading psychologist to know that people who are opposed to SSM but are all for an alternate form of achieving the same means are hardly "obstinately or intolerant" much less bigots. Just saying.

Nope. What you are describing is denial. Pretty simple.

If it is not the same then it is NOT EQUAL. This was already VERY CLEARY DEFINED in Brown v Board 1954.

Anything else that has NOTHING to do with the facts?
 
;)
Nope. What you are describing is denial. Pretty simple.

If it is not the same then it is NOT EQUAL. This was already VERY CLEARY DEFINED in Brown v Board 1954.

Anything else that has NOTHING to do with the facts?
The "fact" is that being in favor of something "equal" but not religiously ordained or sanctioned via a church can hardly be called a denial. Unless you are just being "obstinate or intolerant".

Yes. I'm reminded of this from Chappelle's Show:

Now there is something that has nothing to do with any facts! But I always loved that skit. Now remember at the end, he divorced her! Why? Becasue she was still a n****r lover. I miss Chappelle. Goodnight.
 
;)
The "fact" is that being in favor of something "equal" but not religiously ordained or sanctioned via a church can hardly be called a denial. Unless you are just being "obstinate or intolerant".


Now there is something that has nothing to do with any facts! But I always loved that skit. Now remember at the end, he divorced her! Why? Becasue she was still a n****r lover. I miss Chappelle. Goodnight.

Not sure that any of that has to do with anything relevant to this discussion... goodnight.
 
Not sure that any of that has to do with anything relevant to this discussion... goodnight.
I'm not only sure, but certain that the "fact" is that being in favor of something "equal" but not religiously ordained or sanctioned via a church can hardly be called denial. Unless you are just being "obstinate or intolerant" or in, well, denial. Yip, pretty sure about that.;)
 
Abnormal does not mean bad. Genius level IQ is abnormal.

Outliers can lie on either side of the mean, positive or negative. We've already discussed negative aspects of homosexual behavior and incest. Care to elaborate the cons of extra intelligence?
 
They're both abnormal sexual attractions. Maybe Jerry Sandusky was "born that way". I think the biggest difference is that you have disgust with one but not the other, much like SSM supporters always spew.

It doesn't matter if Sandusky was born that way or not, his actions actually harm others. That is the difference.
 
Outliers can lie on either side of the mean, positive or negative. We've already discussed negative aspects of homosexual behavior and incest. Care to elaborate the cons of extra intelligence?

Actually since we have covered things that you believe are related to homosexuality that are bad, then we should cover those things related to being a genius that are bad.

Genius level IQ is seen to be an indicator of mental disorders. Schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and autism all have much higher incidents in people with high IQs. There is a reason that most supervillians in the comics are doctors or successful businessmen. Even many of our most famous serial killers and mass murderers have had high IQs, extremely high, including the Unabomber who was a genius.

11 Common Traits of Mass Murderers and Serial Killers - NakedLaw by Avvo.com
 
I disagree... I know women that are anti-equal rights. They are sexists against themselves. That is not a valid argument.

Those against SSM ARE bigots. It might be subconscious ignorance... but it is bigotry none the less.
I just looked back at this and seriously have to ask the obvious question! You actually know women that hold these views in 2013? Aside from the fact that you are mixing these anecdotal relations about these women and sexism with bigotry, I do have to agree with you. That is not a valid argument! Much less one that makes people who are for some form of "marriage" being permissible and recognized by the "government" that will satisfy both sides of the marriage argument, as "bigots" and close minded people in denial and practicing an obstinate intolerance. As I said earlier in the thread, the inflexible "activist" from both sides of this argument are IMO greatly responsible for the fact that this matter has not yet been resolved when it could be. Generalizing literally everyone that does not agree with your opinion as bigots is still IMO a HUGE part of the problem. Obstinance and intolerance in the name of supposedly calling out the same does not accomplish much. Or am I wrong? How so? I get that doing so in a forum such as this has its allure, but in reality is it your honest opinion that stance will ever accomplish anything much less sway opinion and influence others who don't agree with the obstinate stance?
 
Actually since we have covered things that you believe are related to homosexuality that are bad, then we should cover those things related to being a genius that are bad.

Genius level IQ is seen to be an indicator of mental disorders. Schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and autism all have much higher incidents in people with high IQs. There is a reason that most supervillians in the comics are doctors or successful businessmen. Even many of our most famous serial killers and mass murderers have had high IQs, extremely high, including the Unabomber who was a genius.

11 Common Traits of Mass Murderers and Serial Killers - NakedLaw by Avvo.com

this is true. i have genius level IQ and most days i am within a gnat's ass of becoming a serial killer. one reason, i believe, that some high IQ people become serial killers and mass murderers is that they are so much smarter than everyone else they tend to see them as inferior and therefore don't really value them as people. another reason is they believe they are smart enough to get away with it, and many of them are...at least for a while. look at all the unsolved murders and missing persons cases across the country, i would hazard a guess that a fair percentage of those are vicitms of a serial killer that has yet to be caught. most serial killers are caught because they tend to kill in a pattern. a very smart individual could avoid patterns by changing the method of killing, race, gender and economic status of victim, location of victim, etc.

kill a rich white guy with a knife in new jersey, kill a crackhead in new york with a gun, strangle an old black lady in atlanta, kill a texas prostitute with a lead pipe, drown a teenager in cleveland, etc, etc, etc. travel from town to town and randomly pick a victim from the phone book. without a pattern or connection between victims, it would be very difficult for the authorities to create a profile and about the only way to catch such a killer would be through blind luck.

14 Serial Killers Who Were Never Captured, In Order Of How Frightening Their Media-Created Names Are | The Awl

14. The Babysitter 13. The Moonlight Murderer
12. Jack the Stripper
11. Bible John
10. The Rainbow Maniac
9. The Grim Sleeper¹
8. The Zodiac Killer
7. Beer Man
6. The Doodler
5. Jack the Ripper
4. Axeman of New Orleans
3. The Mad Butcher of Kingsbury Run
2. Servant Girl Annihilator
1. Charlie Chop-Off
 
Last edited:
this is true. i have genius level IQ and most days i am within a gnat's ass of becoming a serial killer. one reason, i believe, that some high IQ people become serial killers and mass murderers is that they are so much smarter than everyone else they tend to see them as inferior and therefore don't really value them as people.
hanniballecter.jpg

Get a grip on your bad self :)
 
this is true. i have genius level IQ and most days i am within a gnat's ass of becoming a serial killer. one reason, i believe, that some high IQ people become serial killers and mass murderers is that they are so much smarter than everyone else they tend to see them as inferior and therefore don't really value them as people. another reason is they believe they are smart enough to get away with it, and many of them are...at least for a while. look at all the unsolved murders and missing persons cases across the country, i would hazard a guess that a fair percentage of those are vicitms of a serial killer that has yet to be caught. most serial killers are caught because they tend to kill in a pattern. a very smart individual could avoid patterns by changing the method of killing, race, gender and economic status of victim, location of victim, etc.

kill a rich white guy with a knife in new jersey, kill a crackhead in new york with a gun, strangle an old black lady in atlanta, kill a texas prostitute with a lead pipe, drown a teenager in cleveland, etc, etc, etc. travel from town to town and randomly pick a victim from the phone book. without a pattern or connection between victims, it would be very difficult for the authorities to create a profile and about the only way to catch such a killer would be through blind luck.

14 Serial Killers Who Were Never Captured, In Order Of How Frightening Their Media-Created Names Are | The Awl

14. The Babysitter 13. The Moonlight Murderer
12. Jack the Stripper
11. Bible John
10. The Rainbow Maniac
9. The Grim Sleeper¹
8. The Zodiac Killer
7. Beer Man
6. The Doodler
5. Jack the Ripper
4. Axeman of New Orleans
3. The Mad Butcher of Kingsbury Run
2. Servant Girl Annihilator
1. Charlie Chop-Off

I enjoyed studying the messages of Zodiac Killer. Probably 50% of the television shows I watch are crime documentaries.
 
Back
Top Bottom