• 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!

Pa. gov: Gay marriage is like marriage of siblings

Mr.Nick said:
In essence all things are equal - are gays arrested and prosecuted under law for being gay?

Is it ILLEGAL to be gay or engage in gay sex?
Click to expand...

facts , laws, rights and court cases/precedence prove you factually wrong

facts destroy your failed post again
 
Hatuey said:
The 14th establishes freedom of contract. Which is universal regardless of race or sexuality. So are you now saying that gay marriage is legal and to ban it is a breach of constitutional law on the same basis?
Click to expand...

NO you're refering to the "Equal Protection Clause."
 
Mr.Nick said:
MARRIAGE IS NOT A RIGHT NOR A CIVIL LIBERTY - is that too difficult to understand?

I know you wish it was but legally it's NOT...

Marriage is NOT a legal right... Not even heterosexual marriage - that is a status quo...
Click to expand...

marriage is a right, no amount of stomping your feet and holding your breath will change that fact
 
Cardinal said:
Ah, Pennsylvania. The South of the North.
Click to expand...

WHOOOOOA!!!!

the dip**** doesnt represent the all of us lol ;)

PA is actually slated to be one of the next states to have gay marriage two pending court cases are going to see to that. all he is just upset because PAs AG wont defined the bannings of gay marriage so he has too lol
 
AGENT J said:
marriage is a right, no amount of stomping your feet and holding your breath will change that fact
Click to expand...
Actually, this brings up something which interests me...

Could a state, or the federal gov, completely eliminate marriage as a legal system? Obviously the religious/social aspect (X person wants to stay with Y person for the "rest of their lives") cannot be removed...heh...legally....

But the legal aspect...is it required by some law?
 
Mr.Nick said:
You're comparing apples and grapefruit while attempting to call it "fruit" in general..

Besides the courts are tyrannical to begin with considering their entire premise is to override the state and federal legislature in the processes - so what is the point of a state and federal legislature? to throw dog **** at the wall and see what sticks?
Click to expand...

this tactic always make me laugh

Hatuey gives you a factual analogy that proves you wrong and you write of the analogy and say it doesnt count based on . . . . . . .oh yeah, nothing but your opinion . Thats a fail

oh yeah and you deem it a conspiracy theory by the judges, thats hilarious.
Watching posters destroy the lies and nonsense you post is hilarious.
 
J still doesn't get it the concept of "ignore."
 
Mr.Nick said:
As a libertarian my personal opinion on the issue is not needed...

I'm merely pointing out "why" gay marriage is not accepted federally and why some states allow the idea and others don't...

For the last time I'm going to tell you that heterosexual "marriage" isn't even legal - it's status quo.

Once again this has absolutely nothing to do with "gay rights" - this is adequate to "no fair" not discrimination or "gay rights."

Seems you're too big of an advocate to even consider, rationalize or even acknowledge what I'm telling you.
Click to expand...

another dodge, weird you wont answer him
 
Mr.Nick said:
NO you're refering to the "Equal Protection Clause."
Click to expand...

Lol, I'm now getting a serious kick watching you do pirouettes. So you're saying that interracial marriage is legal as per the 14th, but it should not be legal as per the same amendment?
 
AGENT J said:
WHOOOOOA!!!!

the dip**** doesnt represent the all of us lol ;)

PA is actually slated to be one of the next states to have gay marriage two pending court cases are going to see to that. all he is just upset because PAs AG wont defined the bannings of gay marriage so he has too lol
Click to expand...
I think the problem with the article in the OP is that it completely misconstrues the PA Governor's statement.

Granted I don't by any means agree with the guy on everything, but in this case it seems to me that he said nothing wrong. Assuming I am understanding things correctly here.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Oh yeah but you're still stuck on "gay rights" as if gays are being systematically discriminated against...
Click to expand...

they factually are and have been
 
How is it much different? If they argument is that we shouldn't discriminate against other people's relationships and people should be able to marry freely then why keep incest bans in place while SSM is somehow an "equality" or "human rights" issue?
 
The Mark said:
Actually, this brings up something which interests me...

Could a state, or the federal gov, completely eliminate marriage as a legal system? Obviously the religious/social aspect (X person wants to stay with Y person for the "rest of their lives") cannot be removed...heh...legally....

But the legal aspect...is it required by some law?
Click to expand...

You do realize marriage (gay straight) has never been LAW...

The union has NEVER been legislated...
 
The Mark said:
Actually, this brings up something which interests me...

1.) Could a state
2.), or the federal gov, completely eliminate marriage as a legal system?
3.)Obviously the religious/social aspect (X person wants to stay with Y person for the "rest of their lives") cannot be removed...heh...legally....
4.) But the legal aspect...is it required by some law?
Click to expand...

1.)state? no
2.) federal? maybe i dont know, it be very hard since scotus has already deemed it a right 14 times over a matter of 100+ years
3.) true but religion is meaningless to it
4.) this question is actually deeper than you think.

its no required but marriage is no more than a legal contract so where would that start and end
 
digsbe said:
How is it much different?
2.)If they argument is that we shouldn't discriminate against other people's relationships and people should be able to marry freely then
3.)why keep incest bans in place
4.)while SSM is somehow an "equality" or "human rights" issue?
Click to expand...

1.) easy been over this tons
2.) this is not the sole argument on any level thats why all the examples that follow always fail. we should illegally discriminate, we shouldn't deny equal rights

now on to your example

3.) incest was legal, then banned, then legal now mostly banned. THis banning is based of the danger of biological inbedding. Its banned becasue the law determined there could be a victium the child that is more likely to be born deformed.

now if doctors got this wrong, im have no issues with it
if doctors got it right and they want to fight to be married but we regulate breeding based on this that fine by me

either way, none of that has anythign to do with gays marriage

4.) not somehow, factually and equality and human rights issue.
 
digsbe said:
How is it much different? If they argument is that we shouldn't discriminate against other people's relationships and people should be able to marry freely then why keep incest bans in place while SSM is somehow an "equality" or "human rights" issue?
Click to expand...

Gays want marriage officially recognized by the federal government - heterosexuals don't even get that, hence if gays can accomplish the feat - they're setting up a slippery slope based on mere precedence (an idea they don't understand)....

Polygamists and incest psychos will be the next in line to claim they're being "discriminated against.." of course the gays will be the first ones to discriminate against them.
 
AGENT J said:
WHOOOOOA!!!!

the dip**** doesnt represent the all of us lol ;)

PA is actually slated to be one of the next states to have gay marriage two pending court cases are going to see to that. all he is just upset because PAs AG wont defined the bannings of gay marriage so he has too lol
Click to expand...

I wouldn't suggest he represents all of you, but any time I hear a story about someone in the North doing or saying something that you would expect to come out of the South, you can bet that state is going to be Pennsylvania. In my experience that state is practically teeming with old, angry white men, and with every cartoonish stereotype that comes with that image.

I grew up in the North East, and I'm telling you no other state is like Pennsylvania.
 
Mr.Nick said:
J still doesn't get it the concept of "ignore."
Click to expand...

you still dont get the concept of posting lies and me and many others destroying them
trying to ignore it happening doesnt change the fact it is, it just exposes the fear you have of trying to defend the topic and failing
also posting that is not ignoring
 
digsbe said:
How is it much different? If they argument is that we shouldn't discriminate against other people's relationships and people should be able to marry freely then why keep incest bans in place while SSM is somehow an "equality" or "human rights" issue?
Click to expand...

The great state of Tennessee has yet to ban incest marriage. I don't know of a single state that won't recognize cousins married outside of the state even if they won't allow the marriage to be legalized within state lines. Tennessee, where you can **** your cousin and nobody bats an eyes unless that cousin is the same sex as you.
 
The Mark said:
I think the problem with the article in the OP is that it completely misconstrues the PA Governor's statement.

Granted I don't by any means agree with the guy on everything, but in this case it seems to me that he said nothing wrong. Assuming I am understanding things correctly here.
Click to expand...

well i sorta agree about the OP its a little over the top based on the content of the discussion the governed was having

but his statment is definitely wrong still, at lest he was tryign to clean it up from comparing it to child rape but he failed.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) easy been over this tons
2.) this is not the sole argument on any level thats why all the examples that follow always fail. we should illegally discriminate, we shouldn't deny equal rights

now on to your example

3.) incest was legal, then banned, then legal now mostly banned. THis banning is based of the danger of biological inbedding. Its banned becasue the law determined there could be a victium the child that is more likely to be born deformed.

now if doctors got this wrong, im have no issues with it
if doctors got it right and they want to fight to be married but we regulate breeding based on this that fine by me

either way, none of that has anythign to do with gays marriage

4.) not somehow, factually and equality and human rights issue.
Click to expand...

The childhood argument is used against SSM often as well pointing out the fact that their sex isn't reproductive and is biologically wasted from a human reproduction standpoint. Why not allow incest couples to just have abortions if they are with child? There is an increased risk, but it's still just a risk and not a definite outcome. People are against incest because they are bigoted against sibling love. It disgusts them and they go based on their feelings. They are intolerant of that kind of relationship. If two consenting siblings love each other and want to wed who should stop them?

What about a homosexual relationship between siblings? There is no problem with children there, why ban that?

You like to toss around the word "fact" a lot. Please show me the solid, empirical "facts" regarding human rights and why SSM is a human right. Don't confuse your perspective or opinion with "fact" either.

Hatuey said:
The great state of Tennessee has yet to ban incest marriage. I don't know of a single state that won't recognize cousins married outside of the state even if they won't allow the marriage to be legalized within state lines. Tennessee, where you can **** your cousin and nobody bats an eyes unless that cousin is the same sex as you.
Click to expand...

Thank God TN isn't a state with bigoted laws that respects human rights, equality and all that other wonderful stuff :peace
 
Dragonfly said:
So unfortunate that there are people who actually think, believe, and vocalize absolute horse excrement like the above.

Truly sad.

Truly ignorant.
Click to expand...

SO truly sad, and ignorant, in fact, that we need not... actually.... you know.... come up with any reasons why it is wrong. The mere power of our self-congratulation and mutual reinforcement is enough to demonstrate the point. :roll:
 
Cardinal said:
I wouldn't suggest he represents all of you, but any time I hear a story about someone in the North doing or saying something that you would expect to come out of the South, you can bet that state is going to be Pennsylvania. In my experience that state is practically teeming with old, angry white men, and with every cartoonish stereotype that comes with that image.

I grew up in the North East, and I'm telling you no other state is like Pennsylvania.
Click to expand...

hmmm well i dont know what the consensus is outside the state

but inside the state there are many jokes about how theres the cities Pittsburgh and philly and its Mississippi inbetween

i myself have been throughout the Northeast and live here all my life and i have to agree it is unique, you go to the tright mall and you will have every stereotype presnt lol
 
AGENT J said:
hmmm well i dont know what the consensus is outside the state

but inside the state there are many jokes about how theres the cities Pittsburgh and philly and its Mississippi inbetween

i myself have been throughout the Northeast and live here all my life and i have to agree it is unique, you go to the tright mall and you will have every stereotype presnt lol
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, it's the countryside where I picked up that particular first-hand impression, especially the entire area in and around Wilkes Barre. I'm not familiar with the tright mall.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom