• 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!

Senate to vote on gay rights bill by Thanksgiving

read a great op-ed that basically said civil unions = marriage. the difference is civil unions are a touchdown for the gay community, but gay marriage is spiking the ball in the face of their perceived enemies. I agree with that. Lets just take marriage out of the government's hands and let them hand out civil unions to anyone who wishes to apply. Why wouldn't that work and make both sides happy?! Honestly

1) "Separate but equal" is inherently unequal. Creating a second class, by its very nature, brings with it a stigma. The stigma that those people aren't good enough to use our word. They need to get their own. This country settled that decades ago.
2) Civil unions aren't even remotely equal. There are literally hundreds of ways that civil unions aren't treated equally.
3) Truly-equal civil unions are still fought against by the social conservatives. They claim it's a slippery slope to same-sex marriage. Such an "offer" has never been genuine. (as if you should be able to offer or deny someone their rights)
4) I might buy this "government should stay out of marriage" nonsense if people had brought it up before it became obvious that same-sex marriage was going to happen. Where were you with this opinion a decade ago?
 
I might buy this "government should stay out of marriage" nonsense if people had brought it up before it became obvious that same-sex marriage was going to happen. Where were you with this opinion a decade ago?

ding ding ding ding
odd this movement seem to grow once equal rights for gays started winning

not to mention the idea is totally nonsensical and illogical anyway. If one thinks the government should set who can participate im fine with the but the legal contract MUST be protected by law, its that simple.

also along the same lines where was all the religious out cry for the SOME that do it now when people were getting married under different religions from them, or married with no religion involved and married by judges, magistrates, a singing Elvis etc. All that is sin by their logic too, but oddly they were quiet.
 
And if we add sexual orientation to the list that means we can't refuse pedophiles a job because they are pedos. In fact, everyone in the workplace will have to be nice to them to avoid discrimination lawsuits.

This is the stupidest thing I've read all day. Thanks for that.
 
The problem is you won't accept the facts...You gays can call your hook up anything you want but not marriage. That is a union between a man and a woman period.

I disagree.

I'm a heterosexual and I'd look at a marriage contract which legally unites a man to a man or a woman to a woman the same as I'd look at the legal union between a man and a woman.
 
Back
Top Bottom