• 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!

Did you want to...

Did you want to marry the person that you are married to?

  • Yes.

    Votes: 3 75.0%

  • No.

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • Total voters
    4
Kal'Stang

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Question is simple. For those that are married and live in the US.

Did you want to marry the person that you are married to?
 
if you're trying to prove that heterosexuals in the US can marry whoever they want, you're asking the wrong question.
 
emdash said:
if you're trying to prove that heterosexuals in the US can marry whoever they want, you're asking the wrong question.
Click to expand...

No I'm not. Just answer the question if you are married please. There's not much to debate with this question. It's just a simple yes or no question.
 
Kal'Stang said:
No I'm not. Just answer the question if you are married please. There's not much to debate with this question. It's just a simple yes or no question.
Click to expand...

I'm not married. good luck with your poll.
 
Kal'Stang, what is your point or what are you trying to get to?
 
I am just waiting for Crip and Tucker to see this...
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Kal'Stang, what is your point or what are you trying to get to?
Click to expand...

Quite frankly I'm tired of people saying that heterosexuals don't get to marry who they want.

Example A:

Kal'Stang said:
1: Do homosexuals get to marry who they want? 2: Do heterosexuals get to marry who they want? 3: Are the answers the same?

1: No.
2: Yes.
3: No.

Where is the morality in those questions? Is there logic to those questions? Yes.
Click to expand...

Korimyr the Rat said:
First, the answer to both 1 and 2 is "no". There may be fewer laws restricting whom one is allowed to marry than there were forty years ago, but there are still considerable restrictions.

And the morality in those questions is the unproven moral assumption that the answer to 3 is supposed to be "yes". Considering that that's the assumption we are trying to prove by logic, the fact that you are simply assuming the answer without addressing it means that you are misusing logic.
Click to expand...

This poll is to show that statements like the one here in the example are not correct. That those that are against gay marriage are just trying to play semantics when they know darn well what a person means when they say that "heterosexuals are allowed to marry who they want while homosexuals are not".

This thread is to stop that nonsense.

So I ask that all married folks answer this question please.

My only concern is that some won't answer it because they know where it's going to lead to.

Edit note: made an addition to make a correction.
 
Last edited:
oh so when I said

emdash said:
if you're trying to prove that heterosexuals in the US can marry whoever they want, you're asking the wrong question.
Click to expand...

and you answered

Kal'Stang said:
No I'm not...It's just a simple yes or no question.
Click to expand...

what you meant was

Kal'Stang said:
Quite frankly I'm tired of people saying that heterosexuals don't get to marry who they want. This thread is to stop that nonsense.
Click to expand...

interesting, I'll keep this in mind when debating with you in the future. *makes note to self: Kal'Stang sometimes tells outright lies. keep an eye on this one.
 
emdash said:
oh so when I said



and you answered



what you meant was



interesting, I'll keep this in mind when debating with you in the future. *makes note to self: Kal'Stang sometimes tells outright lies. keep an eye on this one.
Click to expand...

Emdash....don't ever call me a liar. And stop playing the semantics game.

if you're trying to prove that heterosexuals in the US can marry whoever they want,
Click to expand...

This statement was leading up to this...

you're asking the wrong question.
Click to expand...

First part is a statement, second part is telling me that I asked the wrong question.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Emdash....don't ever call me a liar. And stop playing the semantics game.



This statement was leading up to this...



First part is a statement, second part is telling me that I asked the wrong question.
Click to expand...

you said it was a simple yes or no question requiring no debate when you were really trying to prove by the poll results that heterosexuals can marry whoever they want. aside from asking the wrong question, which you are definitely doing, you are being deliberately deceptive by oversimplifying a complex issue to manipulate the responses you get.

why not ask people this:

Married people, when you went to the state to fill out your marriage license, did you check a box telling uncle sam which gender you secretly find more attractive? did you swear under oath that you were in love with the person you were marrying?

because everyone would answer no. no, uncle sam doesn't ask. uncle sam doesn't care. but that's not the answer you want, and that's not the answer that will win your argument for you, so you PLAY WITH SEMANTICS to change the results. now you can go to korymir and say, SEE, all of these people who answered my poll really did marry who they wanted.

if you are not a liar it is only by the grace of semantics, so if I were you I'd stop bashing them.
 
emdash said:
you said it was a simple yes or no question requiring no debate when you were really trying to prove by the poll results that heterosexuals can marry whoever they want. aside from asking the wrong question, which you are definitely doing, you are being deliberately deceptive by oversimplifying a complex issue to manipulate the responses you get.

why not ask people this:

Married people, when you went to the state to fill out your marriage license, did you check a box telling uncle sam which gender you secretly find more attractive? did you swear under oath that you were in love with the person you were marrying?

because everyone would answer no. no, uncle sam doesn't ask. uncle sam doesn't care. but that's not the answer you want, and that's not the answer that will win your argument for you, so you PLAY WITH SEMANTICS to change the results. now you can go to korymir and say, SEE, all of these people who answered my poll really did marry who they wanted.

if you are not a liar it is only by the grace of semantics, so if I were you I'd stop bashing them.
Click to expand...

I am asking a straight forward question. I do not play semantics with others. I tell it like it is and expect people to answer me honestly. I have no respect for anyone that plays dumb and goes into semantical arguements trying to prove how wrong a person is when they know damn well what the real question is about. Everyone here knows that you cannot marry your first cousin in most states because it is considered incest. Everyone here knows that you cannot marry a child. Everyone here knows that you cannot marry a goat. Everyone here knows that you cannot marry more than one person. Everyone here knows that homosexuals do not get to marry who they want (someone of the same sex) while heterosexuals do get to marry who they want (someone of the opposite sex).

Play it straight with me or don't play at all. I am not dumb and neither is anyone else here. People that are would be drumbed out of the DP because no one suffers fools here. That is why I like it here. Because people here are not dumb.
 
Kal'Stang said:
I am asking a straight forward question. I do not play semantics with others. I tell it like it is and expect people to answer me honestly. I have no respect for anyone that plays dumb and goes into semantical arguements trying to prove how wrong a person is when they know damn well what the real question is about. Everyone here knows that you cannot marry your first cousin in most states because it is considered incest. Everyone here knows that you cannot marry a child. Everyone here knows that you cannot marry a goat. Everyone here knows that you cannot marry more than one person. Everyone here knows that homosexuals do not get to marry who they want (someone of the same sex) while heterosexuals do get to marry who they want (someone of the opposite sex).
Click to expand...

listen, all of those things you said everyone knows--cousin, child, goat, group--all of those things prove that marriage is never a "do whatever you want" kind of deal. so the fact that homosexuals can't "do whatever they want" IS NOT AN ARGUMENT. the whole point here is that there are restrictions. a current restriction prevents men from marrying men. show why that is wrong, and don't just say "they should be able to do what they want" when that has never been what civil marriage is about.
 
emdash said:
listen, all of those things you said everyone knows--cousin, child, goat, group--all of those things prove that marriage is never a "do whatever you want" kind of deal. so the fact that homosexuals can't "do whatever they want" IS NOT AN ARGUMENT. the whole point here is that there are restrictions. a current restriction prevents men from marrying men. show why that is wrong, and don't just say "they should be able to do what they want" when that has never been what civil marriage is about.
Click to expand...

You are again going into semantics.

18 year old heterosexual male meets 18 year old heterosexual female. They fall in love and marry each other because they want to get married.

18 year old homosexual male meets 18 year old homosexual male. They fall in love and CANNOT marry each other even though they want to.

That is what the homosexuals want. To be able to marry the person that they fall in love with. They do not want to marry their first cousin. They do not want to marry a goat. They do not want to marry multiple partners. (well some might but then again some heterosexuals do to but in this case heterosexuals are denied also, which means no unequality) They do not want to marry a child.

Homosexuals are not asking for more rights: ie marry a goat. They're wanting to marry someone of the same sex. The people that they want to marry.

The whole arguement about laws restricting various things does not work here because they are trying to CHANGE the restricting laws. They are trying to change it to where they are allowed to marry who they want. Within the same confines as a heterosexual being able to marry who they want.
 
Kal'Stang said:
You are again going into semantics.

18 year old heterosexual male meets 18 year old heterosexual female. They fall in love and marry each other because they want to get married.

18 year old homosexual male meets 18 year old homosexual male. They fall in love and CANNOT marry each other even though they want to.

That is what the homosexuals want. To be able to marry the person that they fall in love with. They do not want to marry their first cousin. They do not want to marry a goat. They do not want to marry multiple partners. (well some might but then again some heterosexuals do to but in this case heterosexuals are denied also, which means no unequality) They do not want to marry a child.

Homosexuals are not asking for more rights: ie marry a goat. They're wanting to marry someone of the same sex. The people that they want to marry.

The whole arguement about laws restricting various things does not work here because they are trying to CHANGE the restricting laws. They are trying to change it to where they are allowed to marry who they want. Within the same confines as a heterosexual being able to marry who they want.
Click to expand...

arguing "because they want it" is meaningless because you intend to limit that argument to requests YOU consider to be reasonable. if that's all you've got, I'm done debating with you.

oh and by the way, they ARE asking for more rights. marrying someone of the same sex or marrying a goat, as you put it, are both "more rights" because they are not "existing rights." (if indeed marriage is a right, which I don't think it is.)
 
Wow..someone married thier spouse and didn't want to? Please do tell....Why did you marry your spouse if you didn't want to?
 
emdash said:
arguing "because they want it" is meaningless because you intend to limit that argument to requests YOU consider to be reasonable. if that's all you've got, I'm done debating with you.

oh and by the way, they ARE asking for more rights. marrying someone of the same sex or marrying a goat, as you put it, are both "more rights" because they are not "existing rights." (if indeed marriage is a right, which I don't think it is.)
Click to expand...

Sorry that I won't play the semantics game with you.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Sorry that I won't play the semantics game with you.
Click to expand...

sorry that a cursory glance at the language you choose to employ betrays the lack of substance in your argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom