• 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: MPs debate and vote, The Ayes have it!

disneydude said:
True...but it is still sad to see the rest of the world passing us up. The United States is no longer the country that enjoys the most freedom in the world in many areas.
Click to expand...

That's fine. Most Americans don't deserve the amount of Freedom and Liberty they enjoy right now. Most deserve considerably LESS than they have right now.
 
disneydude said:
True...but it is still sad to see the rest of the world passing us up. The United States is no longer the country that enjoys the most freedom in the world in many areas.
Click to expand...

The issue of Federal recognition of the relationship between same sex couples could have been resolved long ago if the LGBT "community" was not insistant on changing the definition of a word.

Because that has been the approach, it's clear the issue is not about fairness and rights, but about politics and position.

That's a shame.
 
ocean515 said:
The issue of Federal recognition of the relationship between same sex couples could have been resolved long ago if the LGBT "community" was not insistant on changing the definition of a word.

Because that has been the approach, it's clear the issue is not about fairness and rights, but about politics and position.

That's a shame.
Click to expand...

And as such those that have been fighting to have marriage just between a man and a woman have proven all they care about it politics and position.

That's a shame.

See, it works both ways.
 
Tigger said:
That's fine. Most Americans don't deserve the amount of Freedom and Liberty they enjoy right now. Most deserve considerably LESS than they have right now.
Click to expand...

I agree, you deserve less freedom than you have now.
 
TheNextEra said:
And as such those that have been fighting to have marriage just between a man and a woman have proven all they care about it politics and position.

That's a shame.

See, it works both ways.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't.

Obviously, the majority of the people in this country are very firm about maintaining the meaning of the word "marriage". One of the most liberal/progressive states in the United States passed a Constitutional Amendment to maintain the definition of that word. That it has been battled out in the courts is meaningless. The point is it was passed.

This issue would be over today if the LGBT "community" wanted it to be. They don't. They want the definition of a word changed period.

You think it's a big win to have a state call it "marriage"? That's nothing. The big issue is federal rights. Social Security, taxation, property ownership, inheritance, etc, etc.

That comes from the Federal Government, and that recognition isn't even close.

This is an in your face political power play by LGBT groups, and has nothing to do with providing the same government recognized rights for same sex couples as currently exists for heterosexual couples.

That is an irrefutable fact, and that is a shame.
 
Sherman123 said:
I think the US is still the most free country in most respects, especially regarding speech and expression.
Click to expand...
Of what intrinsic value is the right of free speech, in and of itself? Yet to some people it appears to validate an entire political culture.
 
ocean515 said:
The issue of Federal recognition of the relationship between same sex couples could have been resolved long ago if the LGBT "community" was not insistant on changing the definition of a word.

Because that has been the approach, it's clear the issue is not about fairness and rights, but about politics and position.

That's a shame.
Click to expand...

The issues of fairness and rights are perhaps define the key political positions of modern western society. That's like saying, "If only we could leave the issue of taxation out of the debate about political economics.
 
Andalublue said:
Of what intrinsic value is the right of free speech, in and of itself? Yet to some people it appears to validate an entire political culture.
Click to expand...

We could get into the utility of open speech and freedom, but not every right can or should be reduced to a utilitarian equation. Freedom of speech is valuable because it is total unfettered sovereignty of thought and expression, and I and many others, believe it is the fundamental freedom that one can have.
 
Sherman123 said:
I think the US is still the most free country in most respects, especially regarding speech and expression. I also think our system doesn't get enough credit, on the aggregate we've led on abortion, gay marriage, speech, etc. Sometimes its come down on a national level, sometimes making its way through the states. We're a much more progressive country than we get credit for, and have led Europe quite often.
Click to expand...

Not any more. We have fallen way behind many countries even in the realms of free speech and expression, and so much of the world is passing us by on human rights issues.
 
disneydude said:
Not any more. We have fallen way behind many countries even in the realms of free speech and expression, and so much of the world is passing us by on human rights issues.
Click to expand...

I don't think that is true at all. Especially with regards to free speech I think the US is far and away the leader. We remain one of the few Western countries to remain unbowed in the face of Hate Speech, Racial Incitement, and Intolerance speech codes, not to mention strict obstructions to libel and slander suits. This is where I think the ACLU has done a fantastic job of keeping in the public eye.
 
Sherman123 said:
We could get into the utility of open speech and freedom, but not every right can or should be reduced to a utilitarian equation. Freedom of speech is valuable because it is total unfettered sovereignty of thought and expression, and I and many others, believe it is the fundamental freedom that one can have.
Click to expand...

When the right to say something is totally fettered by the total control of the ability to have something heard resting on the whim of a tiny oligarchy, the sovereignty of thought and expression is an illusion.
 
ocean515 said:
The issue of Federal recognition of the relationship between same sex couples could have been resolved long ago if the LGBT "community" was not insistant on changing the definition of a word.

Because that has been the approach, it's clear the issue is not about fairness and rights, but about politics and position.

That's a shame.
Click to expand...

Seriously? Since when does the definition of a word belong to any group? The ultra-right wing acts as if the definition of word is so sacred without recognizing the hypocrisy that it has changed numerous times throughout the course of history.

And you are wrong in your claim as well. The ONLY reason why people have come around on the "civil unions" issue is due to the reality that gay marriage is staring them in the face. The very same people that are all of a sudden ok with civil unions are the same ones that were fighting tooth and nail against them a decade ago. Sorry...but too little too late. Gay marriage will soon be the law of the land...not because of politics and position, but because it is a basic human right and the right thing to do. The United States is late to the game, but ultimately they will get it right.
 
disneydude said:
Seriously? Since when does the definition of a word belong to any group? The ultra-right wing acts as if the definition of word is so sacred without recognizing the hypocrisy that it has changed numerous times throughout the course of history.

And you are wrong in your claim as well. The ONLY reason why people have come around on the "civil unions" issue is due to the reality that gay marriage is staring them in the face. The very same people that are all of a sudden ok with civil unions are the same ones that were fighting tooth and nail against them a decade ago. Sorry...but too little too late. Gay marriage will soon be the law of the land...not because of politics and position, but because it is a basic human right and the right thing to do. The United States is late to the game, but ultimately they will get it right.
Click to expand...

It's ironic and amusing that those who seem so horrified by the phenomenon of Political Correctness want to control the meanings of words according to their political perspective.
 
Andalublue said:
The issues of fairness and rights are perhaps define the key political positions of modern western society. That's like saying, "If only we could leave the issue of taxation out of the debate about political economics.
Click to expand...

Ok.

And?
 
disneydude said:
Seriously? Since when does the definition of a word belong to any group? The ultra-right wing acts as if the definition of word is so sacred without recognizing the hypocrisy that it has changed numerous times throughout the course of history.


And you are wrong in your claim as well. The ONLY reason why people have come around on the "civil unions" issue is due to the reality that gay marriage is staring them in the face. The very same people that are all of a sudden ok with civil unions are the same ones that were fighting tooth and nail against them a decade ago. Sorry...but too little too late. Gay marriage will soon be the law of the land...not because of politics and position, but because it is a basic human right and the right thing to do. The United States is late to the game, but ultimately they will get it right.
Click to expand...


You fail to recognize the issue because your argument continues to focus on the definition of a word, not the recognition the Federal Government grants as a result of the action. When do you want to benefit from the results, rather than fight a battle over the word?

Why are you complaining about people claiming they don't care about the issue? Get together, sign a license, commingle assets.

Again, the only reason this continues to be an issue is because the LGBT community can't stand to let the word "marriage" mean what it does.

Fact.
 
ocean515 said:
The issue of Federal recognition of the relationship between same sex couples could have been resolved long ago if the LGBT "community" was not insistant on changing the definition of a word.

Because that has been the approach, it's clear the issue is not about fairness and rights, but about politics and position.

That's a shame.
Click to expand...

The meanings of words change. In fact the meaning of marriage itself has changed.

And yes it is about fairness and equal rights. You cant create a separate government institution and call it equal.
 
Sherman123 said:
We could get into the utility of open speech and freedom, but not every right can or should be reduced to a utilitarian equation.
Click to expand...

I think that's rather his point. Gay marriage is fundamentally about the inclusion of homosexuals in civil life and the institutions that hold our society together-- is that not valuable for its own sake?
 
ocean515 said:
You fail to recognize the issue because your argument continues to focus on the definition of a word, not the recognition the Federal Government grants as a result of the action. When do you want to benefit from the results, rather than fight a battle over the word?

Why are you complaining about people claiming they don't care about the issue? Get together, sign a license, commingle assets.

Again, the only reason this continues to be an issue is because the LGBT community can't stand to let the word "marriage" mean what it does.

Fact.
Click to expand...

Just like inter-racial couples were not content to let the word marriage mean what it meant?
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
I think that's rather his point. Gay marriage is fundamentally about the inclusion of homosexuals in civil life and the institutions that hold our society together-- is that not valuable for its own sake?
Click to expand...

No gay marriage is about the right of the Individual to define and control their own "personal" life.

Kinda goes down the route of the core Conservative principle, doesn't it?
 
Pagan said:
No gay marriage is about the right of the Individual to define and control their own "personal" life.
Click to expand...
No. Every gay marriage is about that right. Indeed every marriage, gay or straight, is an expression of that right.
 
Omgitsme said:
The meanings of words change. In fact the meaning of marriage itself has changed.

And yes it is about fairness and equal rights. You cant create a separate government institution and call it equal.
Click to expand...

Of course, this is not true, at least in the context of history that is relevant to the point.

You may want to claim the meaning has changed, but it hasn't. That's a fact.

What so many seem to struggle with is appreciating how the issue has been prolonged due to demands over a single word.

In general, nobody appears to care if same sex couples are recongnized by the Federal government in the same manner as heterosexual couples are. Most polls indicate they have no problem with it. However, they seem to care very much about maintaining the traditional definition of the word "marriage".
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
Just like inter-racial couples were not content to let the word marriage mean what it meant?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I thought the issue was same sex couples. A strawman is rather meaningless don't you think? The fact is, while inter-racial issues from long ago were appalling, they still involved heterosexual couples. The definition of the word wasn't different.

Again, this issue would be resolved, as it should be, if the LGBT "community" were truely interested in seeing it done.
 
Andalublue said:
And so that contradicts your assertion that the issue is not about fairness and rights. That's exactly what this is about.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it does.

If the issue were about fairness and rights, the discussion would be about same sex couples being recongized by the federal government in the same manner as same sex couples when they obtain a license, go through a recognized, approved process, and sign appropriate witnessed documents.

Instead, all the energy is spent on demanding the definition of one word be changed.

The facts "speak" for themselves.
 
Marriage defines a moral position that the LGBT community covets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom