• 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? (PART II)

Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

  • Total voters
    154
CLAX1911 said:
No, you want tax exempt status for people that take their kids out of public schools. You dont care about people who dint have children.

you said as much many times.

the school teaches beliefs, that is their job.
Click to expand...

if schools promote the believes of some people and not the believes of others, then yes, it time return school tax money to parents and let them seek their own education for their children.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Not that I saw.



Actually, in order to demonstrate that homosexuality is a normal sexual attraction, all one has to do is show that it is like heterosexuality, an accepted normal sexual attraction, which it is.
Click to expand...
And how do you show that?
 
Cyrylek said:
How do you mean, "normal"? If you are talking about the "norm" as a biological function, why do you consider the widespread (among many social species, not just humans) phenomenon of homosexuality as something "abnormal", and not as a normal adaptive mechanism?
Click to expand...
Is homosexuality a "normal adaptive mechanism?" If so, how?

After all, you would not call bees or naked mole rats - who keep the majority of their species' members "on hold" in terms of procreation - "abnormal" or "perverted", right? They are just what they are, what evolution made them - and not any worse for wear...
Click to expand...
I don't understand how that has anything to do with what we are discussing.
 
ernst barkmann said:
no ...i presented no facts here ..you and the others have, so its on your shoulders to define what you deem as fact.
Click to expand...

I haven't presented any specific facts here either. We are discussing what should be allowed to be taught in schools. You seem to have a problem with what a fact is. Define it.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, a fact is a fact. It's meaning is the interpretation.
Click to expand...

I have seen very few facts posted here. Some would say that 47% of wage earners pay no income tax is a fact, but it is only a restatement of what others have reported. Others would say that SS attraction is normal, but then you would need to define "normal"...
 
Fletch said:
And how do you show that?
Click to expand...

Easy. Demonstrate that homosexuals and heterosexuals have no difference in psychological make-up, and no difference in their general purpose for involvement in relationships.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I haven't presented any specific facts here either. We are discussing what should be allowed to be taught in schools. You seem to have a problem with what a fact is. Define it.
Click to expand...

is homosexuality normal or abnormal..............i myself have not taken a position on it in this thread, but you have.

define why it should not be taught in schools?.....are you asking that of me?
 
AlabamaPaul said:
I have seen very few facts posted here. Some would say that 47% of wage earners pay no income tax is a fact, but it is only a restatement of what others have reported. Others would say that SS attraction is normal, but then you would need to define "normal"...
Click to expand...

I've defined normal, here. The discussion of this thread is what should or should not be taught in schools. I have presented no facts in regards to homosexuality as that is not the scope of the discussion. I could pretty easily, but that would be a derail.
 
ernst barkmann said:
is homosexuality normal or abnormal..............i myself have not taken a position on it in this thread, but you have.

define why it should not be taught in schools?.....are you asking that of me?
Click to expand...

Sure... though I imagine this will lead us right back to the circle of what a fact is.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I've defined normal, here. The discussion of this thread is what should or should not be taught in schools. I have presented no facts in regards to homosexuality as that is not the scope of the discussion. I could pretty easily, but that would be a derail.
Click to expand...

Then you're simply arguing your beliefs. Got it...
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Easy. Demonstrate that homosexuals and heterosexuals have no difference in psychological make-up, and no difference in their general purpose for involvement in relationships.
Click to expand...
But couldn't you do that for every potential relationship? By your standard every relationship is normal.
 
ernst barkmann said:
please continue.......with air
Click to expand...

please continue deflecting and getting owned
so now if you will, in your next post please link/state these facts that support your failed, laughable claims
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Then you're simply arguing your beliefs. Got it...
Click to expand...

Here? No, I'm not. I am discussing the difference between presenting a fact and presenting a belief. This is based on definitions which are facts.

Nice try.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Here? No, I'm not. I am discussing the difference between presenting a fact and presenting a belief. This is based on definitions which are facts.

Nice try.
Click to expand...

So you use the thoughts (e.g. definitions) of others the shape your beliefs. Got it...
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I've defined normal, here. The discussion of this thread is what should or should not be taught in schools. I have presented no facts in regards to homosexuality as that is not the scope of the discussion. I could pretty easily, but that would be a derail.
Click to expand...
What should and should not be taught in schools is always an issue because we basically have government run education. If all education were private and with no state involvement, what children learn and, hence, what is taught, would be up to the parents. As it should be. The proper fight is against the idea of government schools, not what they teach there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom