View Poll Results: Would you vote to legalize same gender marriages?

Voters
142. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I would vote to make gay marriage legal

    99 69.72%
  • No, I would vote against making gay marriage legal

    37 26.06%
  • I am undecided and wouldn't vote

    6 4.23%
Page 16 of 48 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 473

Thread: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

  1. #151
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,772

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by LiveUninhibited View Post
    Well citing the law to support the law is a bit circular, and one reason I distrust the law, but let me correct something. Whatever conservative lawyers might say (most lawyers are nothing but charismatic idiots anyway, as evidenced by Congress), anti-miscegenation laws logically had no more to do with race than anti-SSM laws have anything to do with gender. The relevant issue in both cases is really sexual preference.
    I do not agree. Anti-discrimination laws had precedence with other laws. This is how they were able to enact them. And using the law to support other laws is standard in legal and legislative practices in the US.

    That's incorrect. The California Supreme Court cited many decisions to support their contention that sexual orientation is a suspect criteria for discrimination. Though again, I care more about who is being harmed. Gay marriage harms nobody.
    Not in the context of marriage, as far as I know, but if that is true, please link to the case. And I agree. Gay marriage harms no one.

    No, the Constitution is written in such a way that limits what sorts of laws can stand up in court. In order to challenge a law, people have to be wronged in some way. Being denied the legal ability to marry who you want who also wants to marry you is being wronged. In some cases, this is secondary to some other interest. But in the case of gay marriage, the only party with any real stake in the matter are the gays who want to get married. Nobody is being wronged by the gay marriage in a way that counters the interests of the gay couples.
    And all of this is irrelevant without law on the books that supports it. Enacting new law is appropriate for the route you are going, but this is an uphill battle because there is nothing shows that the government has a vested interest in couple marrying because "they want to". You must have some reason that can be presented that gives cause for the government to support it.

    I already explained why that doesn't make sense. Denying a group of people the right to marry at all was not what anti-miscegenation laws were about, or anti-SSM marriage laws are about. Blacks could get married, they just couldn't marry Whites. Whites could get married, they just couldn't marry Blacks. Everybody could get married, but they're SOL if they happen to like the wrong person. Putting arbitrary restrictions on rights robs those rights of any meaning. Suppose somebody told you that you can marry, but you have to marry a specific kind of person regardless of whether you like them or not. Would you be able to meaningfully exercise your right to marry? Of course not.
    Again, your argument lacks merit, standing, and support. Laws were on the books that allowed men to marry women. Discrimination was easily identified when a black MAN wanted to marry a white WOMAN or vise versa. Plenty of precedence and old law just needed to be modified. Here, discrimination applied, as the concept of marriage was already established as man-woman. What we are talking about is NEW law, that needs a different kind of support. Discrimination doesn't cut it. Gays are not being prevented from marrying.

    And of course I would be allowed to marry and marry meaningfully.

    "want to" is consent. Informed consent is CENTRAL to contracts.
    I want to kill someone, so I have a contract with someone to do that for me. There is no legality that supports this, just as there is no legality that supports man-man marriage, nor woman-woman marriage. In order to enact this, a different angle must be used. Showing how gay marriage benefits the government, society, AND the couple and any family they may choose to have bypasses all of the pot holes that those for GM keep encountering.

    The dog argument is not comparable, because a dog is mentally incapable of comprehending a marriage contract. And without comprehending a contract, meaningful consent cannot be given. Adult lesbians, however, obviously can consent to contracts.
    And there are no laws on the books for either. But if it could be shown how marrying one's dog was beneificial to the government, socieity, and couple/family a case could be made. Since it can't, it would not be allowed. Your issue here is that you are looking at this from a moral/emotional standpoint. I am pro-GM. However, winning this position will NOT be on moral/emotional grounds. It will be on legal grounds. The discrimination position has far to many holes. The government/society/couple/family benefit argument, in as far as enacting new law can win and win easily.


    You didn't even come close to shredding it.
    Of course I did. Easily.

    Love is only one possible motive. It's presence isn't necessary, I was just hoping that those against gay marriage would learn to have empathy for other people.
    That's the point I've been trying to make with you. They won't. Which is precisely why you cannot argue from this position. This is why the discrimination argument and "marrying because I want to" argument will not work. Anti-GM folks, most of them at least, could care less about caring about the feelings of gays. The way around this is the government/society/couple/family benefit argument.

    The government isn't set up to look after it's own interests, but that of the people. Since nobody has a tangible stake against gay marriage, there is no basis to deny gay marriage. The purpose of marriage is not only to benefit society. We don't subject marriages to a test to check to see if it would benefit society. The relevant criteria is that both people consent to the contract, and provided that contract doesn't harm anybody there is no basis to deny it.
    Of course the government is set up to look after it's own interests. This may not be direct, mostly, but it is certainly indirect in nearly all things. The government is not going to do something that harms it...that would make no sense, since harming the government harms the people.

    And marriage benefits society. There is plenty of research that supports that. This is why proving that gay marriage benefits society (of which there is plenty of research that supports this) will win this issue. Easily.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #152
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,772

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I am not arguing from a legal standpoint. My whole stance on gay marriage is we need to agree it needs to happen, and then do what needs to be done to make it legal. I am not a lawyer, so the legal stuff is not my department.
    Arguing this from a moral standpoint is all well and good, but it will convince no one that needs to be convince. One must argue it from a legal/benefit standpoint to win on the issue.

    With that said, there are clear and distinct similarities between anti-miscegenation laws and gay marriage currently. To say they have no similarity is patently false.
    Morally there are. Legally very little. But try answering my challenge. I'll post it again: Please show where and why the government would have a stake in allowing people to marry who they want...for the sole reason of marrying who they want, no other factors may be included.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  3. #153
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:56 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    86,412
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Arguing this from a moral standpoint is all well and good, but it will convince no one that needs to be convince. One must argue it from a legal/benefit standpoint to win on the issue.
    I don't think arguing it from a legal standpoint will have any real impact either, less in fact. Just because there is a legal framework to make something legal does not mean you should. I think that is backwards. You decide something should be legal, and then make it so.

    Morally there are. Legally very little. But try answering my challenge. I'll post it again: Please show where and why the government would have a stake in allowing people to marry who they want...for the sole reason of marrying who they want, no other factors may be included.
    I do not believe that to be true. I believe in the specific case of gay marriage that it should be made legal, that there is no overriding societal need for gay marriage to be illegal, and therefore should be made legal.

  4. #154
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,772

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    It doesn't really matter how they would argue it if their argument is illogical, which it clearly is. You have to remember these are the same people who believe in an invisible man in the sky.
    Legally, from a discrimination standpoint, their position is logical, though narrowly so.

    And knock off the anti-religious crap.

    But there was a time when it was illegal for a white man to marry a black woman and vice versa and the reason that it is no longer illegal is because people realized it was a patent violation of equal protection rights under the law. It's a perfect example of something that was once illegal, like gay marriage is in some places today, an which became legal because it was a basic violation of guaranteed Constitutional rights. We guarantee equal rights for all men (and by extension women), not white men, not straight men, *ALL* men. To give rights to one group and not to another is a basic violation of our guaranteed rights. That's about the best cause you can find.
    I've already argued this a couple of times in this thread. There is no precedence in existing law. There was for men marrying women, so allowing interracial marriage was a discrimination issue. With no precedence, unless new law is created, more difficult than just modifying old law, specific reasons need to be presented. "Because I want to" doesn't do it. Showing benefits does.

    Wrong, it's not. Marriage is a legal contract, any two people who can enter into a legal contract ought to be able to do so. A dog cannot legally enter into a contract, nor can a child. I don't know who you've debated who has failed to point out this very simple fact, but this is simply not a pothole, it's a basic fact.
    Again, I've already pointed out the fallacy of this argument. "Because I want to" alone isn't enough to win the argument. I want to contract to have someone killed. Not legal. Unless I can show a benefit in this, to have it occur I must create new law, which will be somewhat difficult. Showing benefits is a far more attractive and winnable solution.



    I've just shredded your claims, do try again.
    Not in the least. You haven't even come close to tearing a tiny hole in them.

    But they're not. If a straight person can choose who they wish to marry, assuming the other person agrees and reciprocates, and be married under the eyes of the law, then to tell a gay person that they cannot choose the person they wish to marry and likewise have the same right is discriminatory. Telling them that sure, they can be married, just not to the person they want to marry, is an absurd argument. It's like saying everyone can be married, but only to the people their parents choose for them to marry. That was the custom in many places and it was struck down.
    Striking it down will require one to show the benefits, not just "because", since gays can marry. The discrimination argument worked with interracial marriage because there was man-woman marriage precedence. Far more difficult with no precedence. This is why GM is not the law. The movement has place discrimination at the forefront, instead of benefits. I have no idea why, since the benefit argument is so easy to win.



    Too bad you haven't presented a single one.
    Just because you refuse to acknowledge them, doesn't mean they don't exist.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  5. #155
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,772

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I don't think arguing it from a legal standpoint will have any real impact either, less in fact. Just because there is a legal framework to make something legal does not mean you should. I think that is backwards. You decide something should be legal, and then make it so.
    But both exists. It has been decided that it should be legal, so now, how do you do it? Because "I want to"? Doesn't work. You MUST have a framework, and a winning framework to work with. "Because I want to" has completely stalled.

    I do not believe that to be true. I believe in the specific case of gay marriage that it should be made legal, that there is no overriding societal need for gay marriage to be illegal, and therefore should be made legal.
    This is a negative reinforcement argument and will not fly legally. Just because there is no reason that something should not be illegal, does not mean it should be legal. No logic. You must prove why it should be legal.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  6. #156
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,772

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by lincoln View Post
    Anybody willing to vote for for legal marriage for gay couples should also be willing to vote for legal polygamy marriages.
    There is no research that shows that polygamous marriage is beneficial to the government/society/couples/family. Therefore, the polygamy slipperslope argument is nothing but a logical fallacy and does not apply.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  7. #157
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:56 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    86,412
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    But both exists. It has been decided that it should be legal, so now, how do you do it? Because "I want to"? Doesn't work. You MUST have a framework, and a winning framework to work with. "Because I want to" has completely stalled.
    As I have stated, I am not a lawyer. I am not qualified to design a law to make gay marriage legal. If I start talking from a legal standpoint, I am working from weakness in my case. I believe that laws can be designed to make gay marriage legal, but the actual design of such laws is not my department. As long as it can be done, we can then move into should it be done, which is where I argue.

    This is a negative reinforcement argument and will not fly legally. Just because there is no reason that something should not be illegal, does not mean it should be legal. No logic. You must prove why it should be legal.
    I do not agree. If there is no compelling reason to be illegal, and the people desire it to be legal, then there should be no problem. I believe that to be where we are at, trying to round up the support of enough people.

  8. #158
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,772

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    As I have stated, I am not a lawyer. I am not qualified to design a law to make gay marriage legal. If I start talking from a legal standpoint, I am working from weakness in my case. I believe that laws can be designed to make gay marriage legal, but the actual design of such laws is not my department. As long as it can be done, we can then move into should it be done, which is where I argue.
    I'm not a lawyer, either, but one should understand some of the legal ramifications to making something legal. I've argued this from many directions. The discrimination argument is weak and has lots of roadblocks...as we see in reality. The benefit argument is an easy win. Next time there is a GM debate at DP, try arguing it from a government/society/couple/family benefit standpoint. You'll win.

    I do not agree. If there is no compelling reason to be illegal, and the people desire it to be legal, then there should be no problem. I believe that to be where we are at, trying to round up the support of enough people.
    I bolded your confound. As soon as you make this statement, you change the original parameters of your statement. You are no longer making something legal because there is no reason for it to be illegal. People WANT it to be legal. There's your reason. Logic.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  9. #159
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:56 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    86,412
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I'm not a lawyer, either, but one should understand some of the legal ramifications to making something legal. I've argued this from many directions. The discrimination argument is weak and has lots of roadblocks...as we see in reality. The benefit argument is an easy win. Next time there is a GM debate at DP, try arguing it from a government/society/couple/family benefit standpoint. You'll win.
    Like this? http://www.law.ucla.edu/williamsinst...tionReport.pdf

    More than one in three lesbians have given birth and one in six gay men have fathered or adopted a child.
    More than half of gay men and 41 percent of lesbians want to have a child.
    An estimated two million GLB people are interested in adopting.
    An estimated 65,500 adopted children are living with a lesbian or gay parent.
    More than 16,000 adopted children are living with lesbian and gay parents in California, the highest number among the states.
    Gay and lesbian parents are raising four percent of all adopted children in the United States.
    Same-sex couples raising adopted children are older, more educated, and have more economic resources than other adoptive parents.
    Adopted children with same-sex parents are younger and more likely to be foreign born.
    An estimated 14,100 foster children are living with lesbian or gay parents.
    Gay and lesbian parents are raising three percent of foster children in the United States.
    A national ban on GLB foster care could cost from $87 to $130 million.
    Costs to individual states could range from $100,000 to $27 million

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    I bolded your confound. As soon as you make this statement, you change the original parameters of your statement. You are no longer making something legal because there is no reason for it to be illegal. People WANT it to be legal. There's your reason. Logic.
    I considered the bolded part to be self evident I guess. If it's not something people want, then there is no reason to make it legal.

  10. #160
    Global Moderator
    Sinister
    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133,772

    Re: Would you vote to legal same gender marriages?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Tip of the iceberg, my friend. You want links? I've got links.



    I considered the bolded part to be self evident I guess. If it's not something people want, then there is no reason to make it legal.
    Not what you said originally, though, so your original statement is negated and reverts to mine. Once you want something to be legal, you must prove why and you must do it in a "how" that is successful. Just "I want it" isn't good enough.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

Page 16 of 48 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... 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
  •