• 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!

Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

  • No

    Votes: 99 79.2%
  • Yes, explain

    Votes: 26 20.8%

  • Total voters
    125
Status
Not open for further replies.
1.) dude you clearly said i wanted to convince people and wanted approval of MY views i did not, thats just a fact no need talking about it anymore because it will always be a fact :p

So you can't read English, duly noted.

2.) nope not in my opinion it is in fact discrimination and your play on words doesnt change that. Especially with the ways you described marriage. Hypocrite once again lol

You can think that all you like. It does not change anything.

3.) no it doesnt but nice try thats only 1 definition so you sir are 100% wrong see link and definition 2 and 3
Ghetto - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Main Entry: 1ghet·to
Pronunciation: \ˈge-(ˌ)tō\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural ghettos also ghettoes
Etymology: Italian, from Venetian dial. ghèto island where Jews were forced to live, literally, foundry (located on the island), from ghetàr to cast, from Latin jactare to throw — more at jet
Date: 1611

1 : a quarter of a city in which Jews were formerly required to live
2 : a quarter of a city in which members of a minority group live especially because of social, legal, or economic pressure
3 a : an isolated group <a geriatric ghetto> b : a situation that resembles a ghetto especially in conferring inferior status or limiting opportunity <the pink-collar ghetto>



glad you see ghettos as only one way, not surprised with your other views though

thanks for playing :)

I am sure you were not talking about Italians, Jews or any other group since none of them use the term you mentioned. In fact the majority by 99.9% of people who use that term are black.

So I can add liar to the list then?

4.) you havent shown anything but how egg commonly runs down your face:mrgreen:

Right. ;)
 
1.)So you can't read English, duly noted.



2.)You can think that all you like. It does not change anything.



3.)I am sure you were not talking about Italians, Jews or any other group since none of them use the term you mentioned. In fact the majority by 99.9% of people who use that term are black.

So I can add liar to the list then?



Right. ;)

1 only in fantasy world but the proof and facts are in this thread
2. doesnt matter what i or you "think" facts remain the same and its discrimination
3.You are sure? they dont use that term? but originally you said you didnt even understand what i was talking about. Now not only are you cliaming you understand it but "YOU" are telling "ME" how I used it and who the people are that use it???????? hmmmm is that more egg on you? yes it is

and WOW did you also just imply that the only people that use slang are 99.9% black? :shock:

jeez you got some issues, no liar here and i dont know you well enough to call you a racist but you are at least prejudice against blacks

also it still stands i was 100% right and you were wrong with stereotypical thought and you didnt even understand what you were reading and highlighted LMAO

the egg just gets thicker and thicker on your face

4.) I know ;)
 
1 only in fantasy world but the proof and facts are in this thread
2. doesnt matter what i or you "think" facts remain the same and its discrimination
3.You are sure? they dont use that term? but originally you said you didnt even understand what i was talking about. Now not only are you cliaming you understand it but "YOU" are telling "ME" how I used it and who the people are that use it???????? hmmmm is that more egg on you? yes it is

and WOW did you also just imply that the only people that use slang are 99.9% black? :shock:

jeez you got some issues, no liar here and i dont know you well enough to call you a racist but you are at least prejudice against blacks

also it still stands i was 100% right and you were wrong with stereotypical thought and you didnt even understand what you were reading and highlighted LMAO

the egg just gets thicker and thicker on your face

4.) I know ;)

:lol:

123456789
 
Trying to convince someone who is prejudiced that they are wrong is just a waste of time.

No one thinks they are prejudiced; they always have reasons that make perfect sense to them -- from Muslim extremists who think that it's perfectly moral to bomb innocents, to Christian extremists who historically have justified discrimination against women and non-whites without any idea that their positions are anything but reasonable.
 
Trying to convince someone who is prejudiced that they are wrong is just a waste of time.

No one thinks they are prejudiced; they always have reasons that make perfect sense to them -- from Muslim extremists who think that it's perfectly moral to bomb innocents, to Christian extremists who historically have justified discrimination against women and non-whites without any idea that their positions are anything but reasonable.

very true we just saw a case of this a couple posts ago, it was obvious and I tried to let them know yet they were in denial
 
Trying to convince someone who is prejudiced that they are wrong is just a waste of time.

No one thinks they are prejudiced; they always have reasons that make perfect sense to them -- from Muslim extremists who think that it's perfectly moral to bomb innocents, to Christian extremists who historically have justified discrimination against women and non-whites without any idea that their positions are anything but reasonable.

Yea it was those dirty Christians that held down women and blacks.

"Coupled with the abolitionist movement was a growing women’s rights movement, which demanded that the same rights guaranteed in the Constitution to men be extended to women also. The women’s movement in America was birthed out of the ranks of the abolitionists. As Christian women began to speak out for the rights of blacks in their country, they began to realize that they, too, were victims of slavery.

In a recent study of 51 of the major women leaders of the abolition-feminist movement, 48 came from Christian backgrounds.1 Some of these women included Lucretia Mott, an evangelical Quaker who helped to found the Anti-Slavery Society in 1833; Angelina Grimké, who presented female anti-slavery petitions to the Massachusetts state legislature; as well as Lucy Stone and Susan B. Anthony.

Popularized by New Awakening evangelicals, the women’s movement gained momentum when people began to realize that there was no biblical support for inequality between the sexes. In Jesus’ encounter with Mary and Martha, they found proof that Jesus valued women’s roles as disciples. Jesus’ rebuke to Martha clearly showed that women were not to be relegated to works of service toward men.2
" - Models for Reformation: The Women's Suffrage Movement (1800s) — The Forerunner

Like everything else, two sides even within Christianity exist.

Blatant exaggerations and generalizations are just wrong.

At the time they were the "extremists" so it all boils down to where you sit at the time.
 
Last edited:
Yea it was those dirty Christians that held down women and blacks.

"Coupled with the abolitionist movement was a growing women’s rights movement, which demanded that the same rights guaranteed in the Constitution to men be extended to women also. The women’s movement in America was birthed out of the ranks of the abolitionists. As Christian women began to speak out for the rights of blacks in their country, they began to realize that they, too, were victims of slavery.

In a recent study of 51 of the major women leaders of the abolition-feminist movement, 48 came from Christian backgrounds.1 Some of these women included Lucretia Mott, an evangelical Quaker who helped to found the Anti-Slavery Society in 1833; Angelina Grimké, who presented female anti-slavery petitions to the Massachusetts state legislature; as well as Lucy Stone and Susan B. Anthony.

Popularized by New Awakening evangelicals, the women’s movement gained momentum when people began to realize that there was no biblical support for inequality between the sexes. In Jesus’ encounter with Mary and Martha, they found proof that Jesus valued women’s roles as disciples. Jesus’ rebuke to Martha clearly showed that women were not to be relegated to works of service toward men.2
" - Models for Reformation: The Women's Suffrage Movement (1800s) — The Forerunner

Like everything else, two sides even within Christianity exist.

Blatant exaggerations and generalizations are just wrong.

At the time they were the "extremists" so it all boils down to where you sit at the time.

lol :rantoff:
 
As long as people do no harm and are good citizens, what they do with their own lives is their own business.

ricksfolly
 
As long as people do no harm and are good citizens, what they do with their own lives is their own business.

ricksfolly

hats off to you sir, what a fair american non discriminative view. :applaud
 
As long as people do no harm and are good citizens, what they do with their own lives is their own business.

ricksfolly

hats off to you sir, what a fair american non discriminative view. :applaud

Unless it involves...

Polygamy
Certain Drugs
Certain guns
Prostitution
Gay Marriage

And the list go's on.

What laws you support has nothing to do with being an American. But that's right, you know exactly what the founding fathers intended. Well so do I, a utopia for the white male...

Slavery
Sexism
Calssism

The person who wrote most of the Constitution thought Homosexuals should be castrated and worse.

He also owned slaves.

Are all things they supported.

I guess they were less than Americans as well?
 
Last edited:
Figures you would have nothing to input that was relevant. :2wave:

what needs said, you seem to go off for no reason, the poster was simply saying people who are prejudice dont know most times and was saying extremists are typically bad

some how you "seemed" to take that personally and went on some type of sarcastic rant that didnt make sense

if you rant was relevant i would have had a reply but i couldnt make heads or tails of it since it was o random? LMAO
 
what needs said, you seem to go off for no reason, the poster was simply saying people who are prejudice dont know most times and was saying extremists are typically bad

some how you "seemed" to take that personally and went on some type of sarcastic rant that didnt make sense.

He was inferring most religious people are somehow extremists. My statements made perfect sense.

Goes back to that whole "English" thing I mentioned before.

if you rant was relevant i would have had a reply but i couldnt make heads or tails of it since it was o random? LMAO

In other words you have nothing. Noted. :2wave:
 
Unless it involves...

Polygamy
Certain Drugs
Certain guns
Prostitution

And the list go's on.

What laws you support has nothing to do with being an American. But that's right, you know exactly what the founding fathers intended. Well so do I, a utopia for the white male...

Slavery
Sexism
Calssism

The person who wrote most of the Constitution thought Homosexuals should be castrated and worse.

Are all things they supported.

I guess they were less than Americans as well?


who are you answering for? you obviously dont have a clue how i feel but ill let you knoe

polygamy: my stance on polygamy is the same has gay rights as long as its consenting adults its none of my buisness nor is it any of yours what so ever lol

certain drugs? what drugs, weed for example is illegal for all accept in very specific cases so there no discrimination there its illegal FIRST then given to certain groups. Marriage is LEGAL first and you want it not to be given to certain groups thats discrimination.

certain guns? what guns see above and IMO guns, all guns should be legal and we just do a better job of enforcing the laws controlling them and issuing them

prostitution: see my views on polygamy and gay marriage the only thing with prostitution is that its needs regulated since it would be looked at as a business if legal.

also the founding fathers had certain views on religion didnt they, tell me what jefferson said about religion? LMAO BUT he still didnt want it discriminated against he was too smart for that and we advanced because times change along with the size and needs. They knew they rules had to be active and not absolute forever LOL @ you realizing you know you are wrong but not admitting it
 
Yea it was those dirty Christians that held down women and blacks.

Oh of course there were Christians on both sides, just like there are Christians today who accept gays and even marry them.

My point still stands -- there are extremists who read their religion so strictly that they hold prejudiced views which they justify because of their beliefs, and as such see nothing wrong with it. How can it be wrong for me to discriminate, they say, when my God tells me to?
 
He was inferring most religious people are somehow extremists. My statements made perfect sense.

Goes back to that whole "English" thing I mentioned before.



In other words you have nothing. Noted. :2wave:


no he did not say most religious people are extremist lLMAO hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
jeez you're sensitive and emotional

you made a meaningless rant and knee jerked over something you misunderstood

nothing to say to meaningless rant but to laugh, good try though, keep up the god work :D

how could i possible make a statement against something that is meaningless
 
He was inferring most religious people are somehow extremists.

No I wasn't. I specifically said "religious extremists" so to differentiate them from regular religious people.

Don't go thinking you can define the actual words I used in a completely different way than they mean.

See? This is why it is waste to debate bigots; their heads are too hard to penetrate. Facts and actual literal words read exactly as written mean nothing.
 
Oh of course there were Christians on both sides, just like there are Christians today who accept gays and even marry them.

My point still stands -- there are extremists who read their religion so strictly that they hold prejudiced views which they justify because of their beliefs, and as such see nothing wrong with it. How can it be wrong for me to discriminate, they say, when my God tells me to?

wait, you mean you didnt mean all religious people are extremists? LMAO
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
guess i read your english wrong, oh wait, no I read it right. It was somebody else who totally misunderstood and jumped the gun and went into an emotional meaningless rant :D
 
No I wasn't. I specifically said "religious extremists" so to differentiate them from regular religious people.

Don't go thinking you can define the actual words I used in a completely different way than they mean.

See? This is why it is waste to debate bigots; their heads are too hard to penetrate. Facts and actual literal words read exactly as written mean nothing.

this is common place for him,
you see in his world he get to tell YOU what you actually mean no matter what you say
 
Oh of course there were Christians on both sides, just like there are Christians today who accept gays and even marry them.

Agreed

My point still stands -- there are extremists who read their religion so strictly that they hold prejudiced views which they justify because of their beliefs, and as such see nothing wrong with it. How can it be wrong for me to discriminate, they say, when my God tells me to?

If they are following the tenant's of whatever faith correctly I have no problem. In my case the Bible, is pretty clear about homosexuality.

So I will stop it if I can by voting for what I feel is morally right. Religion aside, I still would not support it. This is my choice, and it has nothing to do with being bigoted or prejudiced. It has to do with following my own path.

I want them to have all the same benefits under the law. I don't want it called marriage because I do not feel it is. The only reason I can think of why this is unacceptable is the people who want to redefine marriage want it to legitimize somehow homosexuality etc.

I can't get behind that.
 
No I wasn't. I specifically said "religious extremists" so to differentiate them from regular religious people.

Don't go thinking you can define the actual words I used in a completely different way than they mean.

See? This is why it is waste to debate bigots; their heads are too hard to penetrate. Facts and actual literal words read exactly as written mean nothing.

And you completely left out any other groups.

Then you calll me a bigot because you only used religous group.

You are the bigot. I think you are projecting.
 
Agreed



If they are following the tenant's of whatever faith correctly I have no problem. In my case the Bible, is pretty clear about homosexuality.

So I will stop it if I can by voting for what I feel is morally right. Religion aside, I still would not support it. This is my choice, and it has nothing to do with being bigoted or prejudiced. It has to do with following my own path.

I want them to have all the same benefits under the law. I don't want it called marriage because I do not feel it is. The only reason I can think of why this is unacceptable is the people who want to redefine marriage want it to legitimize somehow homosexuality etc.

I can't get behind that.

its actually because its discrimination no matter how you slice it and it wont be redefining anything just more false propaganda by you.

I Really cant wait till the day its legal it wont be that long. It will be legal and you can still view it has wrong, not believe in it, teach its wrong, preach its wrong, not think its legitimate and your church/religion can do the same NOTHING will change, you wont be affected one bit in reality LMAO

and thats why this country is great :D
 
And you completely left out any other groups.

Then you calll me a bigot because you only used religous group.

You are the bigot. I think you are projecting.

Wow just wow:shock:
could anybody possible jump to any more of a worthless, defensive, emotional, knee jerk, insanity wrong conclusion and assumption LMAO
 
its actually because its discrimination no matter how you slice it and it wont be redefining anything just more false propaganda by you.

How is it not redefining it?

I Really cant wait till the day its legal it wont be that long. It will be legal and you can still view it has wrong, not believe in it, teach its wrong, preach its wrong, not think its legitimate and your church/religion can do the same NOTHING will change, you wont be affected one bit in reality LMAO

And yet in 2010, it's still not legal in most states and with the Federal government.

I am good.

and thats why this country is great :D

It certainly is.
 
Wow just wow:shock:
could anybody possible jump to any more of a worthless, defensive, emotional, knee jerk, insanity wrong conclusion and assumption LMAO

What knee jerk? Everyone has bigotry of some type. It is human nature. I think he is reflecting his onto me.

Nothing knee jerk about that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom