• 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!

Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
Just as God intended!! You don't believe in God, fine, take that position up with your "creator."
Click to expand...

My creators were my mother and father. They know I'm not Christian, and don't care. So, there we go.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Koros said:
Wrong. The 14th Amendment's Equal Protection clause states that no state may make a law which denies equal access, under the law, to residents of their or any other state. The 14th Amendment is the reason why you can be a licensed driver in Virginia, and not need to get a new license for driving in Maryland. The Virginia law (which grants you a driver's license) must be recognized by Maryland.

Likewise, the law which grants marriage must not deny equal access to the law to a segment of the population. This was the reason why interracial marriage bans were deemed unconstitutional and why same-sex marriage bans are equally unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

Sorry but you have equal access just like I do. Marriage isn't defined in the Constitution, Marriage isn't a civil right, it is state law controlled by the states. Some have changed their laws. You don't like the laws of your state move to one more suitable to you. The SC has upheld the states' rights to make their laws and have never ruled on the definition of marriage. Keep doing what you are doing and you are forcing the people to do it for you.

You misinterpret Loving vs. Va because that is what you want to believe. That was totally about race discrimination, not marriage. Both heterosexual couples were adhering to the laws of the state and were being denied solely on the basis of race
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Koros said:
My creators were my mother and father. They know I'm not Christian, and don't care. So, there we go.
Click to expand...

Well, there you go, probably why you are so unhappy and miserable spending all your time in a political debate forum trying to sell your ideology to others. Always can tell a liberal, the most unhappy group I have ever seen
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

CaptainCourtesy said:
No, this is incorrect. In previous studies, the control group was chosen from only mental health patients and criminals. This creates bias if one is studying mental health, as the participants already have mental health issues. To eliminate this, it is obvious that one chooses people who are specifically NOT mental health patients or criminals.
Click to expand...


Hmmm... Sorry CC, but DV is actually correct. He is using the same measure, and it appears although maybe I read you wrong but you seem to be missing his point. In your above scenario, if a study wanted to show that a certain behavior has no adverse or mental effects on the one engaging in the behavior, one would expect that they could accomplish this by avoiding participants that have no expressed or reported mental health issues. I mean, that's just pretty basic logic. In the converse, if one wanted to show the opposite, then the opposite group would contain participants that did in fact express reported mental health effects. The Hooker study was the first of its kind in that it took participants that "self-reported" no adverse effects from homosexuality. All the studies that lead up to her study selected participants from groups that did report adverse effects.


One does NOT select people from the general population as if one does, one cannot control for the potential bias that will confound the results. You STILL don't understand the study, even though I've now explained it to you several times.
Click to expand...


Well, I think you have it backwards, frankly. Ideally, one would select blindly from the general, administer the questions before controlling for the variables. So as an example, one might approach it this way.

1. Select 1000 random people (College kids looking for money are a good source)
2. Administer questions with the purpose of identifying mental issues assign a number to each participant's answers.
3. Take background information from the participants, identifying the variables of each participant. Age, sex, sexual orientation, etc..
4. Place similarly situated participants together as control groups and apply the results in a statistical model looking for correlations that are significant.






Tim-
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
Well, there you go, probably why you are so unhappy and miserable spending all your time in a political debate forum trying to sell your ideology to others. Always can tell a liberal, the most unhappy group I have ever seen
Click to expand...

Aww, aren't you adorable, with your ad homs and hasty generalizations. I'm actually quite happy in my life, thank you. Oh, and if you look to the left, right under my name and avatar, you'll see "Libertarian" not "Liberal." Remember, Reading is Fundamental!
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
Sorry but you have equal access just like I do. Marriage isn't defined in the Constitution, Marriage isn't a civil right, it is state law controlled by the states. Some have changed their laws. You don't like the laws of your state move to one more suitable to you. The SC has upheld the states' rights to make their laws and have never ruled on the definition of marriage. Keep doing what you are doing and you are forcing the people to do it for you.

You misinterpret Loving vs. Va because that is what you want to believe. That was totally about race discrimination, not marriage. Both heterosexual couples were adhering to the laws of the state and were being denied solely on the basis of race
Click to expand...
Is it possible that I misinterpreted Loving v Virginia? Yes, it is. My degrees aren't in law, so it isn't my area of expertise. But, I will have to research that before I take the word of an anonymous homophobe on the internet.

Now, as to the same-sex marriage laws issue, are you really suggesting that the solution should be "if you don't like our state laws, leave?" So, citizens shouldn't fight to change the laws they don't like? They should just accept whatever the State says and leave if they don't like it?
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Koros said:
Aww, aren't you adorable, with your ad homs and hasty generalizations. I'm actually quite happy in my life, thank you. Oh, and if you look to the left, right under my name and avatar, you'll see "Libertarian" not "Liberal." Remember, Reading is Fundamental!
Click to expand...

Yes, I can tell how happy you are. What I find interesting about Libertarians is that the first part of that word is the basis for the term liberal and I see liberalism coming out of you. I always thought libertarians were for limited govt. but not so in the case of marriage and sexual orientation. The votes of the people don't matter thus need to be overturned by the govt. or the courts. That is hardly Libertarian
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Peter Grimm said:
You haven't shown me any facts yet. I remain unimpressed.
Click to expand...

another post and another dodge by you lol, no surprise
facts win again
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
Yes, I can tell how happy you are. What I find interesting about Libertarians is that the first part of that word is the basis for the term liberal and I see liberalism coming out of you. I always thought libertarians were for limited govt. but not so in the case of marriage and sexual orientation. The votes of the people don't matter thus need to be overturned by the govt. or the courts. That is hardly Libertarian
Click to expand...
Haha! "But, your word starts the same as THEIR word, that's proof!" Do you actually think things through before you post?

As for libertarians and limited government, yes I am ALL FOR limited government. Ideally, the government would be about 10% the size it is now (be it municipal, state, or federal). If I could, I would completely dismantle any and all legal marriage recognitions. But, since that will never happen, there is only one alternative. If we have to have a government recognized and sponsored contract, the only way for equality to exist is to extend that contract to all people regardless of sex, sexual orientation, religion, or race. It's called "picking your battles."

EDIT to add: As for the "votes of the people," perhaps you should move to a democracy if you don't like the fact that the courts have the legal authority to overturn popular vote. The tyranny of the majority is never something I would support.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Something else to make Conservative's brain pop. I told him that the fight for equal rights would be fought on two fronts: state votes and the courts. I forgot to include state attorney generals that won't defend the ban.

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Oregon's attorney general will not defend the state's ban on gay marriage, arguing it cannot withstand a federal constitutional challenge.
Click to expand...

Oregon Won't Defend State's Gay Marriage Ban
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

And apparently I haven't been keeping account. All but 8 of the states that prevent gay marriage are filing suits?

Cases are now pending in all but eight of the 33 states that forbid gay couples to marry. Most have been filed since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled last June that the federal government cannot refuse to recognize same-sex marriage in the states where it's legal.
Click to expand...

Same-Sex Marriage Lawsuits Exploding in U.S. Courts - NBC News

The USSC ruling really was the beginning of the end.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Koros said:
Actually, no it's not. If you know anything about social sciences, you would know that "the most scientifically valid description" is a load of horse crap when applied to the humanities. "Queer theory," which in and of itself is a disgusting name, has a great many learned detractors.

And you never answered my question. Are you honestly saying that the billions of people in this world who identify as purely attracted to only one sex are wrong?
Click to expand...

The complete inability to be attracted to one gender is inconsistent w/the evidence obtained from observing complex non-human primates and other animals.

However, no conclusive study has been on humans alone as to whether gayness or straightness is a myth. Such a study would have to involve humans who have been completely isolated from the social pressures associated w/popular perceptions of how humans are supposed to behave sexually, and that's likely impossible to set up.

Any other study would be invalid.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
Well, there you go, probably why you are so unhappy and miserable spending all your time in a political debate forum trying to sell your ideology to others. Always can tell a liberal, the most unhappy group I have ever seen
Click to expand...

Uhm, this fits equally, with this poster ^
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Koros said:
Is it possible that I misinterpreted Loving v Virginia? Yes, it is. My degrees aren't in law, so it isn't my area of expertise. But, I will have to research that before I take the word of an anonymous homophobe on the internet.

Now, as to the same-sex marriage laws issue, are you really suggesting that the solution should be "if you don't like our state laws, leave?" So, citizens shouldn't fight to change the laws they don't like? They should just accept whatever the State says and leave if they don't like it?
Click to expand...

Good, do the research and get back to me. While you are researching please find the term marriage in the Constitution.

Got it, if a homosexual told you something you would believe it but because I told you something you have to do the research. Try doing it with what the homosexual tells you as well and ask that homosexual as to what their problem is with civil unions?
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Koros said:
Haha! "But, your word starts the same as THEIR word, that's proof!" Do you actually think things through before you post?

As for libertarians and limited government, yes I am ALL FOR limited government. Ideally, the government would be about 10% the size it is now (be it municipal, state, or federal). If I could, I would completely dismantle any and all legal marriage recognitions. But, since that will never happen, there is only one alternative. If we have to have a government recognized and sponsored contract, the only way for equality to exist is to extend that contract to all people regardless of sex, sexual orientation, religion, or race. It's called "picking your battles."

EDIT to add: As for the "votes of the people," perhaps you should move to a democracy if you don't like the fact that the courts have the legal authority to overturn popular vote. The tyranny of the majority is never something I would support.
Click to expand...

Courts do not have the authority to overturn a Constitutional Amendment and that is what you are going to force on the SSM crowd. You aren't going to like the outcome. Courts don't agree and it is interesting that you only buy the rulings that support your point of view
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Redress said:
Please stop, engaging in purely hetero or homosexual acts is not the same thing as being gay or straight....
Click to expand...

If the terms "gay" and "straight" were defined as whether one is most likely to find attractive attributes in members of the same or opposite sex, then there would be no problem.

But that's not the way they're defined. As they're used in daily life, they mean someone who permamently excludes, a priori, a member of the same or opposite sex from his romantic life, because his psyche doesn't permit such an attraction.

And the two definitions are not equivalent.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
Which is why this country is going to be forced into a Constitutional Amendment defining marriage, no court can overrule that
Click to expand...

And what happens when two parts of the constitution conflict? Not that such a silly amendment would ever pass, but the arguments that it violates equal protection would still be valid. The only body that could rule which part of the constitution trumps whichever other part would be the supreme court. So, despite what you say, such a situation could very well result in the court overruling a constitutional amendment.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

solletica said:
The complete inability to be attracted to one gender is inconsistent w/the evidence obtained from observing complex non-human primates and other animals.

However, no conclusive study has been on humans alone as to whether gayness or straightness is a myth. Such a study would have to involve humans who have been completely isolated from the social pressures associated w/popular perceptions of how humans are supposed to behave sexually, and that's likely impossible to set up.

Any other study would be invalid.
Click to expand...

Exactly. No such study exists, so for you to claim that pure attraction to only one gender does not exist is, at best, intellectually dishonest. At worst, it smacks of personal agenda.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
Good, do the research and get back to me. While you are researching please find the term marriage in the Constitution.

Got it, if a homosexual told you something you would believe it but because I told you something you have to do the research. Try doing it with what the homosexual tells you as well and ask that homosexual as to what their problem is with civil unions?
Click to expand...

Reading is fundamental. I thought I told you that already. I never said I would take the word of a gay person without question. Quit it with the straw men arguments. They don't help your case.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
Courts do not have the authority to overturn a Constitutional Amendment and that is what you are going to force on the SSM crowd. You aren't going to like the outcome. Courts don't agree and it is interesting that you only buy the rulings that support your point of view
Click to expand...
No, courts do not have that authority. On that, you are correct. But, there is no evidence that a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage is, or wil be, happening. So, you can keep dreaming.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Paschendale said:
And what happens when two parts of the constitution conflict? Not that such a silly amendment would ever pass, but the arguments that it violates equal protection would still be valid. The only body that could rule which part of the constitution trumps whichever other part would be the supreme court. So, despite what you say, such a situation could very well result in the court overruling a constitutional amendment.
Click to expand...

And what two parts would that be, when Marriage is defined there is no conflict. You want sexual preference protected and that is never going to happen.
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Koros said:
No, courts do not have that authority. On that, you are correct. But, there is no evidence that a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage is, or wil be, happening. So, you can keep dreaming.
Click to expand...

You are wrong, when the courts overturn the will of the people the people will speak and always have
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
You are wrong, when the courts overturn the will of the people the people will speak and always have
Click to expand...

So if the will of the people tomorrow were to ban interracial marriage you would just shrug?
 
re: Actress Ellen Page: "I am gay"[W:1222]

Conservative said:
And what two parts would that be, when Marriage is defined there is no conflict. You want sexual preference protected and that is never going to happen.
Click to expand...

He's referring to the equal protection clause, which was specifically made to protect minorities against the will of a majority.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom