• 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 about the polygamists!?! [W:693]

What say you?

  • Yes. All humans should be protected under the law.

    Votes: 23 26.4%

  • No. Marriage is between one man and one woman, period.

    Votes: 18 20.7%

  • No. Only homosexuals and heterosexuals should be allowed to marry.

    Votes: 5 5.7%

  • I don’t care what they do as long as they stay out of my business.

    Votes: 31 35.6%

  • My cat’s name is Mittens.

    Votes: 10 11.5%
  • Total voters
    87
  • Poll closed .
roguenuke said:
You are wrong.
Click to expand...
I'm almost never wrong; especially when debating leftists, like you. Read below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_A.V._Club

Now that you've become acquainted with the A.V. Club, look at the top right corner of the link below next to the Facebook icon:

Gay-Pride Parade Sets Mainstream Acceptance Of Gays Back 50 Years | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

You'll notice the AV Club icon, which clearly indicates which part of the Onion that article belongs. So, what we can take from all this, is that most, if not all, homosexuals are freaks at heart, and when you put them together in large masses, it becomes a modern day Sodom & Gomorrah.

Now, I'm not interested in any more idiotic diversions. You ignored my other links about the dangers homosexuals bring to community health, and that's where this discussion will return.

Welcome back to the original argument. ;)
 
Lakryte said:
There's no such thing as left and right, only right and wrong. And gay marriage is not wrong. Calling gay marriage communistic is pathetic. It is clear you have nothing knowledgeable to contribute, so I will leave you to spew your nonsense on your own. Nobody cares about your false ideology.
Click to expand...
Got any links to legitimate sources, or evidence to the contrary? Certainly you don't expect me to take your word on this. Or do you? Can you be that crass? I know many on the Left are.
 
Dooble said:
I'm almost never wrong; especially when debating leftists, like you. Read below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_A.V._Club

Now that you've become acquainted with the A.V. Club, look at the top right corner of the link below next to the Facebook icon:

Gay-Pride Parade Sets Mainstream Acceptance Of Gays Back 50 Years | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

You'll notice the AV Club icon, which clearly indicates which part of the Onion that article belongs. So, what we can take from all this, is that most, if not all, homosexuals are freaks at heart, and when you put them together in large masses, it becomes a modern day Sodom & Gomorrah.
Click to expand...


Oh but you are so wrong here my friend.

This is an actual article from the AV Club, taken directly from the bottom of the page you linked.

Fruitvale Station | Film | Movie Review | The A.V. Club

This is an onion satirical article again taken straight from the page you originally linked.

Eminem Terrified As Daughter Begins Dating Man Raised On His Music | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

Notice in the AV article the AV emblem is in the upper left corner. You also might notice that the AV emblem also appears on your browser tab. Your original link and the Eminem page both have the Onion emblem on the tab and the AV Club words are over by the Twitter and Facebook links. Your Gay-Pride Parade article is a straight Onion piece and NOT a part of the AV Club.

Now, I'm not interested in any more idiotic diversions. You ignored my other links about the dangers homosexuals bring to community health, and that's where this discussion will return.

Welcome back to the original argument. ;)
Click to expand...

Actually the original argument is about polygamy.
 
maquiscat said:
Oh but you are so wrong here my friend.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I'll concede that part of the argument. But that still doesn't absolve the gay community of its bizarre behavior, which is the focus of my original point:

West Hollywood Gay Pride Parade 2012 - Celebrating Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals & Transgenders - YouTube


maquiscat said:
Actually the original argument is about polygamy.
Click to expand...
Actually I was referring to the original diversion, but you're right. I let detractors like Roguenuke, disrupt the thread. You're not a detractor too, are you?
 
Dooble said:
Fair enough, I'll concede that part of the argument. But that still doesn't absolve the gay community of its bizarre behavior, which is the focus of my original point:
Click to expand...

What about the bizzare behavior of any other group or more to the point, portions of those groups? Such as the punks, goths, fandom, oh this could go on. The point being the bizarre behavior of any group is a) relative and b) irrelevant to to topic at hand which is broadly marriage and it's meaning and associate rights, and specifically polygamy (which as a reminder comprises of both polygymy and polyandry)


Actually I was referring to the original diversion, but you're right. I let detractors like Roguenuke, disrupt the thread. You're not a detractor too, are you?
Click to expand...

I guess it would depend on how you view being detracted. There are many common arguments that are use with polygamy and SSM that were also used for interracial marriage. Regardless of the context in which they are brought, if the counter applies to the current topic then I try to stay within the topic while answering it. I don't think there is a individual on this forum that hasn't drifted at one point or another.
 
maquiscat said:
What about the bizzare behavior of any other group or more to the point, portions of those groups? Such as the punks, goths, fandom, oh this could go on.
Click to expand...
It sure could. The point is, the bizarre behavior of those groups don't make homosexuals any more "enlightened", which was my original jab, in the first place.... unless you believe this kind of thing is a form of enlightenment.

maquiscat said:
The point being the bizarre behavior of any group is a) relative and b) irrelevant to to topic at hand which is broadly marriage and it's meaning and associate rights, and specifically polygamy (which as a reminder comprises of both polygymy and polyandry)
Click to expand...
But it is relevant as a side note, which is why I posted that link to Roguenuke, in the first place. The real point is, that most homosexuals are freaks at heart, which is evidenced by their stupid parades.

maquiscat said:
I guess it would depend on how you view being detracted. There are many common arguments that are use with polygamy and SSM that were also used for interracial marriage. Regardless of the context in which they are brought, if the counter applies to the current topic then I try to stay within the topic while answering it. I don't think there is a individual on this forum that hasn't drifted at one point or another.
Click to expand...
The focus should remain on Polygamists, and that isn't the case now. This has turned into another war of words on homosexuality.
 
Last edited:
Dooble said:
It sure could. The point is, the bizarre behavior of those groups don't make homosexuals any more "enlightened", which was my original jab, in the first place.... unless you believe this kind of thing is a form of enlightenment.

But it is relevant as a side note, which is why I posted that link to Roguenuke, in the first place. The real point is, that most homosexuals are freaks at heart, which is evidenced by their stupid parades.

The focus should remain on Polygamists, and that isn't the case now. This has turned into another war of words on homosexuality.
Click to expand...

They can be "freaks" however much they like, as far as I'm concerned. All I know is I have to go to West Hollywood if I want a consistently higher class of restaurant.

I just can't understand getting worked up about the parades.
 
Dooble said:
It sure could. The point is, the bizarre behavior of those groups don't make homosexuals any more "enlightened", which was my original jab, in the first place.... unless you believe this kind of thing is a form of enlightenment.
Click to expand...

But it doesn't make them any less enlightened, either. But then I supposed what encompasses enlightened is pretty much opinion.

But it is relevant as a side note, which is why I posted that link to Roguenuke, in the first place. The real point is, that most homosexuals are freaks at heart, which is evidenced by their stupid parades.
Click to expand...

Given that most homosexuals don't participate in such "stupid parades" you're painting with a rather broad brush. And "freak" relative to what?

The focus should remain on Polygamists, and that isn't the case now. This has turned into another war of words on homosexuality.
Click to expand...

The above arguments could easily be, and have been, made against polys and the counters are still the same.
 
Dooble said:
Got any links to legitimate sources, or evidence to the contrary? Certainly you don't expect me to take your word on this. Or do you? Can you be that crass? I know many on the Left are.
Click to expand...
:beatdeadhorse
 
maquiscat said:
But it doesn't make them any less enlightened, either. But then I supposed what encompasses enlightened is pretty much opinion.
Click to expand...
You got that right. The Left's form of enlightenment is pretty much anything outside of traditional family values.

maquiscat said:
Given that most homosexuals don't participate in such "stupid parades" you're painting with a rather broad brush. And "freak" relative to what?
Click to expand...
Given that NONE of the homosexuals protest these stupid parades, tells me that they tolerate them at the very least. "Freak" relative to parading rainbow tights, and S&M leather outfits in public. You know, the stuff you deem perfectly normal.

maquiscat said:
The above arguments could easily be, and have been, made against polys and the counters are still the same.
Click to expand...
not quite.
 
Dooble said:
I'm almost never wrong; especially when debating leftists, like you. Read below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_A.V._Club

Now that you've become acquainted with the A.V. Club, look at the top right corner of the link below next to the Facebook icon:

Gay-Pride Parade Sets Mainstream Acceptance Of Gays Back 50 Years | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

You'll notice the AV Club icon, which clearly indicates which part of the Onion that article belongs. So, what we can take from all this, is that most, if not all, homosexuals are freaks at heart, and when you put them together in large masses, it becomes a modern day Sodom & Gomorrah.

Now, I'm not interested in any more idiotic diversions. You ignored my other links about the dangers homosexuals bring to community health, and that's where this discussion will return.

Welcome back to the original argument. ;)
Click to expand...

You are wrong about this. I told you exactly why and proved it and you continue to bring up stuff that has nothing to do with what I showed proved that it was fake. The parade didn't happen, the group that "sponsored" the parade doesn't exist, and the professor quoted in the article doesn't exist. It was satire, fiction, full of bologney.

Heck, you apparently don't even know what Sodom and Gomorrah was about since you are trying to reference it in this debate when same sex marriage nor homosexuality had anything to do with those stories either.
 
Dooble said:
You got that right. The Left's form of enlightenment is pretty much anything outside of traditional family values.
Click to expand...

It can as easily be argued that the Right's form of enlightenment is pretty much anything outside of freedom and liberty. Not that I truly believe either argument, or at least not with such a broad brush. Traditions come and go, old ones die out and new ones develop and some old ones even get revived. I mean how traditional do you really want to go? We could go back to arranged marriages and the showing of the bloody bed-sheets.

Given that NONE of the homosexuals protest these stupid parades, tells me that they tolerate them at the very least. "Freak" relative to parading rainbow tights, and S&M leather outfits in public. You know, the stuff you deem perfectly normal.
Click to expand...

I would guess that you are rather isolated as I've heard protests from people within the GBLT community. They, quite frankly, see such parades as detrimental to their attempts to be treated equally. They also, however, tend to also recognize the freedom that these people have to hold such events, thus there are few formal protests. As to "freak", have you been to a con lately and seen the cosplayers? Now there are some freaky people! And most of them pretty darn cool.

not quite.
Click to expand...
Quite
 
Dooble said:
I'm almost never wrong; especially when debating leftists, like you. Read below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_A.V._Club

Now that you've become acquainted with the A.V. Club, look at the top right corner of the link below next to the Facebook icon:

Gay-Pride Parade Sets Mainstream Acceptance Of Gays Back 50 Years | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

You'll notice the AV Club icon, which clearly indicates which part of the Onion that article belongs. So, what we can take from all this, is that most, if not all, homosexuals are freaks at heart, and when you put them together in large masses, it becomes a modern day Sodom & Gomorrah.

Now, I'm not interested in any more idiotic diversions. You ignored my other links about the dangers homosexuals bring to community health, and that's where this discussion will return.

Welcome back to the original argument. ;)
Click to expand...

That's the onion! HA HA HA (Breathes) Ha ha haha. You seriously built your argument on a fictional newspaper article? It's FAKE dude, the entire article is fake. The parade didn't happen, the people interviewed were characters, the NYU professor was made up. The real parades have been relatively tame and wholesome. I go to gay bars on occasion and they have the exact same stuff that regular bars have (except better music and more gays). No sex orgies, or devil worship, or immorality of any kind. They are normal people, get over it.

On the issue of polygamists, there are no polygamist bars so I don't know how they compare :lol: . If they want to get married, let them. "Marriage" only has meaning if you give it one and it only has the meaning you give it. If polygamists want to get married, then it means what they want it to mean, by definition. The only issue is how we deal with the taxes and other legal issues that arise from marriage. I suggest that we completely separate "marriage" from the government in any way, then it doesn't matter.
 
roguenuke said:
You are wrong about this. I told you exactly why and proved it and you continue to bring up stuff that has nothing to do with what I showed proved that it was fake. The parade didn't happen, the group that "sponsored" the parade doesn't exist, and the professor quoted in the article doesn't exist. It was satire, fiction, full of bologney.
Click to expand...
Hey. Come join me at the end of your thought. I've already been here.

roguenuke said:
Heck, you apparently don't even know what Sodom and Gomorrah was about since you are trying to reference it in this debate when same sex marriage nor homosexuality had anything to do with those stories either.
Click to expand...
Why are you still typing? Get one small victory during these debates, and now you're trying to chest up.

OK, tough gal, tell me about Sodom and Gomorrah.
 
Dooble said:
Hey. Come join me at the end of your thought. I've already been here.

Why are you still typing? Get one small victory during these debates, and now you're trying to chest up.

OK, tough gal, tell me about Sodom and Gomorrah.
Click to expand...
Sodom and Gomorrah are not relevant to the US Constitution and the law.
 
Lakryte said:
Sodom and Gomorrah are not relevant to the US Constitution and the law.
Click to expand...
Neither is liberalism, yet the Left keeps trying to change them.
 
Dooble said:
Neither is liberalism, yet the Left keeps trying to change them.
Click to expand...
Red herring. I'm not talking about liberalism, I'm talking about Sodom and Gomorrah. And that story is irrelevant to marriage law.
 
Lakryte said:
Red herring. I'm not talking about liberalism, I'm talking about Sodom and Gomorrah. And that story is irrelevant to marriage law.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. You're talking about something that has nothing to do with my argument.
 
Dooble said:
Irrelevant. You're talking about something that has nothing to do with my argument.
Click to expand...
You referenced Sodom and Gomorrah in your arguments several times. It obviously has something to do with your argument. If you have since changed your mind, then it looks like we're making progress.
 
Lakryte said:
You referenced Sodom and Gomorrah in your arguments several times. It obviously has something to do with your argument. If you have since changed your mind, then it looks like we're making progress.
Click to expand...
Please stop typing. Take five minutes, grab a snack, and then settle in for a nice read. I'm not responding again until you can converse intelligently on how and why I referenced Sodom and Gomorrah.
 
Dooble said:
Please stop typing. Take five minutes, grab a snack, and then settle in for a nice read. I'm not responding again until you can converse intelligently on how and why I referenced Sodom and Gomorrah.
Click to expand...

Why you referenced Sodom and Gomorrah is easy, you believe that Sodom (and Gomorrah by extension) was destroyed because of homosexuality. You are wrong, even just using the Bible. The Bible never says this and even believing it is from the one part of the story itself that talks about homosexuality at all is stupid because it is not talking about consensual same sex relationships at all but rather attempted rape that is part of a display of power/humiliation over visitors to the city. Even in the NT, it says that S&G were destroyed because of greed, inhospitality toward guests (attempted rape would be pretty inhospitable and have nothing at all to do with homosexuality, same sex attractions, nor same sex marriage), and arrogance. God never once says that they were destroyed at all in connection with same sex marriage, same sex attractions, same sex sexual activities, nor homosexuality. That is something the Christian (and Islamic) religion came to believe (and quite recently in fact) because of men in the church misinterpreting (majorly) what they read. The religion that had the story first, Judaism, scoffs at the belief that Sodom or Gomorrah were destroyed due to homosexuality or same sex relationships.
 
roguenuke said:
Why you referenced Sodom and Gomorrah is easy, you believe that Sodom (and Gomorrah by extension) was destroyed because of homosexuality.
Click to expand...
Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed because of sin. Homosexuality was only part of it.
 
Dooble said:
Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed because of sin. Homosexuality was only part of it.
Click to expand...
I can't remember the name, but I remember a Biblical scholar putting it like this; Christians claiming Sodom and Gomorrah is a story about Homosexuality is just like thinking a story about an Axe Murderer is a story about an Axe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom