• 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!

Chris Christie set to veto gay marriage bill

Ockham said:
Language and the definition of words has been and continues to be very important. Marriage is reserved for a man and a woman. Man and man, woman and woman, and any other combination that society deems acceptable now or in the future should not be defined or named "marriage". I've actually had this same view since I got here on DP.
Click to expand...

Why? Marriage is made up by society anyway, why shouldn't society be able to change it?
 
Your Star said:
Why? Marriage is made up by society anyway, why shouldn't society be able to change it?
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing society cannot change the definition of words.
 
Ockham said:
I'm not arguing society cannot change the definition of words.
Click to expand...

Then what's all the uproar about the definition of marriage? Makes no sense.
 
Ockham said:
Probably true, though the number of gay divorces and divorce lawyers will rise.
Click to expand...

The nation's population will rise and the number of divorces and divorce lawyers will go up anyway.

Ockham said:
I don't have a problem with gay marriage, I have a problem with the terminology.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm an artist, and I have to tolerate people calling themselves "artists" because they cover themselves in feces as a protest against "post-modern exceptionalism."

We've all got problems.
 
Your Star said:
Then what's all the uproar about the definition of marriage? Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

I don't know where there's an uproar about it, I'm simply stating it's not a marriage. Pick a different word or set of words. Wanna call it "gay marriage"? Ok by me. Wanna call it "supercool same sex mofo's" that's swell too.
 
Ockham said:
I don't know where there's an uproar about it, I'm simply stating it's not a marriage. Pick a different word or set of words. Wanna call it "gay marriage"? Ok by me. Wanna call it "supercool same sex mofo's" that's swell too.
Click to expand...

Why can't it be a marriage?
 
Ockham said:
I don't know where there's an uproar about it, I'm simply stating it's not a marriage. Pick a different word or set of words. Wanna call it "gay marriage"? Ok by me. Wanna call it "supercool same sex mofo's" that's swell too.
Click to expand...

Seriously. When it's just called "marriage," you'll be fine. Your boss will still be an asshole, your teenage daughter will think you're ruining her life, beer will be sudsy and cold, and you'll have to mow your lawn every damn week. Everything will be the same, because at the end of the day nobody will be able to gay marry at you.
 
Last edited:
Cardinal said:
The nation's population will rise and the number of divorces and divorce lawyers will go up anyway.
Click to expand...
Certainly you see the point that a new pool of clients is over and above the general rise or fall of population. :roll:


Cardinal said:
Yeah, I'm an artist, and I have to tolerate people calling themselves "artists" because they cover themselves in feces as a protest against "post-modern exceptionalism."

We've all got problems.
Click to expand...
Well fecal art is art by some. Just like scratching a chalkboard with fingernails may be called "music". I just happen to be one of those people who doesn't think fecal art is real art, fingernails on chalkboards is not really music, and that a homosexual union shouldn't be called a "marriage". English has an abundance of words more so than most languages - you'd think we could give everyone their own term and positive definition.
 
Cardinal said:
Seriously. When it's just called "marriage," you'll be fine. Your boss will still be an asshole, your teenage daughter will think you're ruining her life, beer will be sudsy and cold, and you'll have to mow your lawn every damn week. Everything will be the same, because at the end of the day nobody will be able to gay marry at you.
Click to expand...
All things do not have personal investment in whether or not it affects me. Whether or not I'll be fine or not is irrelevant.
 
Ockham said:
All things do not have personal investment in whether or not it affects me. Whether or not I'll be fine or not is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Maybe I forgot to mention that your friends and family, and extended family and friends of friends, will be fine too. Nobody will be able to gay marry at them either.
 
Cardinal said:
Maybe I forgot to mention that your friends and family, and extended family and friends of friends, will be fine too. Nobody will be able to gay marry at them either.
Click to expand...

And ... yep just checked... still irrelevant.
 
Cardinal said:
As irrelevant as the impact of gay marriage on your life?
Click to expand...

Apparently you didn't read where I previously stated I have no problem with gay marriage, just what language is used to define it.
 
Ockham said:
Thanks for proving my point --- "Same sex marriage" not "marriage". Sounds fine by me.
Click to expand...

I'll bet there were still a bunch of hangers-on calling marriages between races "interracial marriages" for a while. But even racists probably concluded it was too much of a mouthful.
 
Ockham said:
Apparently you didn't read where I previously stated I have no problem with gay marriage, just what language is used to define it.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I should have said "As irrelevant to your life as the use of the word "marriage" for two gay people's marriage?"

Whew.
 
Ockham said:
Why should the word "up" be reserved for things that are elevated?
Click to expand...

That's not the argument I was making, you are claiming that marriage should be only for a one man and one woman relationship, and I am asking why. And since marriage is a purely human construction, and is malleable, why can't a 2 woman, or 2 men enter into a marriage?


Also there are already SSM, happening in every state, and no one can stop it. SSM exists, so in essence your definition is wrong. The only thing we are fighting for is the legal recognition of those marriages, not for the permission to enter into a marriage in the first place.
 
Cardinal said:
Reporting on a trend is not the same as titling those marriages "interracial marriages." But you know what? This is boring. Call it "gay marriage" if you want. I guarantee it won't matter to anyone else.
Click to expand...

You call it gay marriage.... if you REALLY thought it was "marriage" you wouldn't need to say "gay" before it... clearly you have issues with it as well.

Oh and clearly... CBS is one of those "hanger ons" you were mentioning.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom