• 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!

Judge strikes down Michigan's ban on gay marriage[W:95]

WTF? Can someone explain that one to me?

sure

the post that you quoted is just further proof that one has no idea how the constitution works, law works, freedom works, the court system works or rights work.

this has been obvious for pages and pages ;)
 
Last edited:
So you are just going to take away the children who are being raised by same sex couples and prohibit same sex couples from raising kids? I consider that evil. You not only lost any credibility in my eyes but have shown your true character.
No to your first question, In a free society I do not think it is possible, plausibly optimal but probably not possible...but if a SS couple have them one takes ones chances and gets what one gets in custody battles... one cannot complain and besides, no sympathy, not my/our problem.

I would certainly not allow for SS adoption. Toleration is one thing, condoning, acceptance or promotion is simply out of the question.

I truly might care about your opinion on that if I cared at all about your opinion. We have crossed swords enough for me to have a fairly accurate assessment, your expressed ideology is not compatible with those of the people I might desire to impress.
 
Did all that you quote about women change them into something other than the gender they were? They were still marrying the opposite gender, men... so, marriage didn't change, women changed a bit, but they were sill women marrying men... no biggie.

Yes, well, truthfully I have seen some of your astute analyses prior. I think I'll just comfortably wait for the real decision, thank you very much.

Of course not...we are still women...but with equal rights in marriage.

SSM doesnt change gay men or gay women....it just gives them equal rights in marriage.

And I can only gloat over your waiting...and eventual realization, lolololol.
 
No to your first question, In a free society I do not think it is possible, plausibly optimal but probably not possible...but if a SS couple have them one takes ones chances and gets what one gets in custody battles... one cannot complain and besides, no sympathy, not my/our problem.

I would certainly not allow for SS adoption. Toleration is one thing, condoning, acceptance or promotion is simply out of the question.

I truly might care about your opinion on that if I cared at all about your opinion. We have crossed swords enough for me to have a fairly accurate assessment, your expressed ideology is not compatible with those of the people I might desire to impress.

Meh. If you are the fruit of your ideology, then I think you do us all a service by making posts like these so we know how to judge it.

I have worked in social services long enough to understand the realities of this world. I have seen opposite sex couples who neglect and abuse children. Just being an opposite sex couple does not imbue people with the natural ability to parent or act responsibly in the best interest of children. There are same sex couples who are responsible and very capable parents. Even in this case, the state of Michigan argued that these two women are excellent parents. Somehow your ideology blinds you so deftly that you ignore reality and choose to believe that same sex couples who could be excellent parents should be denied that opportunity based on nothing more than because they are same sex couples, and even if that puts children in less qualified homes or as continued wards of the state. Truly, you represent your ideology well, where you care so little for children as to put your own selfish interest ahead of what is in the best interest of kids who need good and stable homes.
 
They are the highest court in the land. If they say same-sex marriage is a constitutional right and must be legal nation-wide, that's the law. Precisely zero people are going to do anything about it. Nobody is going to war over this, and that's what it would take to reject a Supreme Court decision: toppling the US government.


You have been told numerous times that nobody is suggesting that everything goes under the 14th. Maybe this will help you realize it finally, because either you are missing these posts or you're literally not smart enough to understand them. Nobody says equal protection fits everything. You've been told what the test is. Not everything passes that test.

Nobody is going to war over same-sex marriage. That's just fantasy.


So do it already and quit talking about it. I am so tired of all these whiny right-wingers ranting for years about tyranny, socialism, communism, "2nd amendment remedies," and all that internet tough guy bull****. It's all talk, you are never going to do a thing. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it. So step up or quit embarrassing yourselves. If you really thought this was tyranny, you'd have been fighting already.
Oh, dang, you're so knowledgeable about...well, everything...so yes, I will just drop all thought and unhesitatingly follow what you say...good lord almighty, what farcical comedy we have right here.

So, you right, you right... nothing to worry about here, look the other way.

Hey, guessing you must be Mister I am following everything but I just can't seem to keep it straight, huh? lots of people have said lots of things here in these posts to me... most of it wishful thinking and prognosticating based on liberal ideas on how things ought to, will and must go based on certain criteria locked into by the SC... and I am saying if they overstep their bounds, and I don't think they will, but if the SC tries to change society, a society that is not so desirous of this change, well, especially with all the other crap hitting the fan, not just tea party groups, not just conservatives, not just republicans, not just independents, now even democrats are running from this train wreck, the boobama express railroading us with his liberal socialism, his inability to lead, all the corruption, coverups, all the spying, the attempted suppression of the opposition... all the things you folks ignore are simmering on a stove that's heating up... and this kinda full out bull crap right here on SSM is adding real fuel to that fire.

But... I am fairly certain the SC will understand its place in history...

Oh, and...

Bless your heart, here comes the whiny ass complaints about perceived whiny right wingers, too too funny... Ahhhh...poor little thang, somebody hurt your feelings did they? Just won't go along, be convinced by the sweet emptiness of your rhetoric, eh? Maddening for sure when you just know deep in your heart you are right...yeah, right. Might just be time to take a rest... or at least give it a rest. You got nothing except emotions on your side of the debate, emotions coupled with a lot of tinkering with the system making it somewhat unworkable.

BTW, we try to work things out, bend over backwards, then when we have finally had enough, we kick butt.

We have had enough.;)
 
Oh, dang, you're so knowledgeable about...well, everything...so yes, I will just drop all thought and unhesitatingly follow what you say...good lord almighty, what farcical comedy we have right here.

So, you right, you right... nothing to worry about here, look the other way.

Hey, guessing you must be Mister I am following everything but I just can't seem to keep it straight, huh? lots of people have said lots of things here in these posts to me... most of it wishful thinking and prognosticating based on liberal ideas on how things ought to, will and must go based on certain criteria locked into by the SC... and I am saying if they overstep their bounds, and I don't think they will, but if the SC tries to change society, a society that is not so desirous of this change, well, especially with all the other crap hitting the fan, not just tea party groups, not just conservatives, not just republicans, not just independents, now even democrats are running from this train wreck, the boobama express railroading us with his liberal socialism, his inability to lead, all the corruption, coverups, all the spying, the attempted suppression of the opposition... all the things you folks ignore are simmering on a stove that's heating up... and this kinda full out bull crap right here on SSM is adding real fuel to that fire.

But... I am fairly certain the SC will understand its place in history...

Oh, and...

Bless your heart, here comes the whiny ass complaints about perceived whiny right wingers, too too funny... Ahhhh...poor little thang, somebody hurt your feelings did they? Just won't go along, be convinced by the sweet emptiness of your rhetoric, eh? Maddening for sure when you just know deep in your heart you are right...yeah, right. Might just be time to take a rest... or at least give it a rest. You got nothing except emotions on your side of the debate, emotions coupled with a lot of tinkering with the system making it somewhat unworkable.

BTW, we try to work things out, bend over backwards, then when we have finally had enough, we kick butt.

We have had enough.;)

again, do you have anything besides deflections?
all we need is you to provide one argument that can be support with anything logical, accurate, factual or reality based. We have been waiting page after pager after page.

heck you still have yet to provide one reason equal rights harms you.
 
When marriage becomes a farce nobody will marry any longer... who would want to be part of a joke? Without marriage among heterosexuals you have rising poverty rates among single parents and children, besides which they do not get the benefit of training, parenting and a critical understanding of both sexes growing up. Kinda like learning math with only addition and no subtraction.

no reason has been given or can be given that show same sex marriage to make marriage a farce

if the benefits of marriage are what you mention hear it never can be one

im sure gay people marrying wont make more people pore might help with gay people who are raising kids

can you tell me what training your talking about and how preventing same sex marge will give it to more kids?
 
YOu know really, if you are an adult, some of this stuff you can figure out on your own. Just sit and think about it outside of your preconditioned, public school propagandized, media influenced box... there, answered and instructed at the same time, killing two birds with the one stone.

your suffering from conspiracy theory's
 
OMG, read the damn thread... its not like I have not answered this more than a couple of times.

iv been reading it you seem to be full of crazy **** and logical fallacy's so your going to have to do better then you have been to answer the question
 
Your posts are becoming increasingly annoyingly vapid. What is the state's legitimate interest in stopping a person's marriage to a tree if nobody [ a tree isn't somebody ] is injured/harmed? You folks want to use this one size fits all tool, so we can use it legitimately back against you.

o the irony vapid he says

the state doesn't need to do **** the tree can not accept a marriage proposal

its about as possible as sewing a tree maybe less at least a tree can cause damage

its legitimist and you know sane to think about that regarding people its crazy to apply it to trees honestly man
 
As a hard working, tax paying, 2nd class citizen of the United States born and raised... I don't think I should have to pay taxes to a government, state or federal, that is willingly going to deny me the rights and priviledges of full citizenship just because some douchebags think it is icky or deviant. These people can't even come up with a valid reason for the denial of these rights. People don't like it. We get it. Don't get married to someone of the same gender. It is really that easy. Oh, we have to protect traditional marriage. You know what, it's too late for that ****. Y'all let Kim and Brittany do it for you. Gays are gross! Take your binoculars off and mind your own damn business. We don't want to bake a cake for those damn homos. Fine. Just pray you don't live in an area with an anti-discrimination policy that includes orientation. My religion doesn't agree with it! Well that's too damn bad. We don't live in a theocracy. This is a country with blended cultures. Get over it.

I will fight for my right to be treated equally and fairly under the law. There is no reason to deny me the right to marry a man of my choice and there never has been. People not liking it isn't reason enough. It's protection from the tyranny of the majority, not the tyranny of minority.
 
Wow
lets just ignore facts and laws and peoples rights

your argument fails again since PERSONS enter into contracts.

Your post Fails again

bless his heart its that kind of post that helps people see theirs no reason to stop gay marriage
 
Yeah, based on that, just how screwed up and far are you folks on the left gonna take these things...? Showing your hand now... this is getting to the point of circus level bizzarly absurd.

See what 40 years of an onslaught against reason has done? Made a total muddle and waste of otherwise good brains, brains that should be striving towards uplifting America, not taking us down.

how's America with less gay marriage uplifted how one with more being taken down

you might just be a bit muddled yourself on this
 
40 years from now you and those like you will appear the same as those who were against interracial marriages in the 1960s.

The intelligent people of this country support same sex marriage in large percentages. In fact, there is a correlation to be made between intelligence level and support of same sex marriage, as well as education level and support for same sex marriage. We know what will come of same sex marriage being legal, people being treated better no matter what sex/gender of person they wish to be married to.

no need to wait he looks like that now
 
We have about 10 thousand years of data... how many same sex cultures have survived out there again?

Oh yeah, none. Nada, zero, zilch.

um gay marriage wont create a same sex culture iv never heard of a culture that gave up on hetero sexual acts and some gay people even reproduce and or raise family's im hetero sexual that's more then I have ever done so what are you on about
 
No, you don't follow at all. Sorry, I cannot keep explaining all of life and every nuance of life to you. I was only explaining how race does not matter in marriage whereas gender does matter, that the arguments are not the same for each case and so using a same structured argument in the case of same sex does not hold any bearing on a race based case. And I am not here to re-argue every single case in every single state or federal court. Procreative abilities of opposite genders with one another are provable whereas the lack of same is provable in same sex couples. There is not a specific imperative to have children if one marries. However, one of the major reasons for marriage is to create strong family units for people who do procreate so that children are given some safeguards and should not simply be abandoned.

Family stability has been under attack for a long time as well, you folks may well have destroyed the idea of it, and its demise is resulting in much unnecessary harm, with much of poverty issuing from single parent families.

Stability of the institution of marriage and protection of children are sufficient state interests. No, we are not going to allow just anything and just anybody to get married. Sorry, there is no legitimate state interest in such.

whys gender matter when it comes to marriage procreation cant be it you don't need to be able to breed to have a hetero sexual marriage my girl friend is to old to have kids we could get hitched I doubt you would bat an eye
 
I live in the real world, so just because you are dreaming, don't imagine that all the rest of us are asleep.

Might you have lower divorce rates due to less people getting married? Hard to get divorced if you never married. And yes, the liberal agenda has been a constant assault on marriage, so SSM is only one of the many pronged attacks on marriage and American culture in general.

Marriage is for adults, but mainly for adults in which to have a structure that legally protects families [children ]. We can argue this back and forth all day. I would hazard the hypothesis that if adult heterosexuals did not/could not have children, I would surmise that marriage would soon go out of style completely. Even with it, and the onslaught of liberal attack on it from all directions, it is in serious decline.

you might have less divorce but that wont necessity mean a lower rate of divorce if less people get married you will definitely have more marriages if more people get married

theirs no reason for you to divorce your wife or husband because same sex marge exists so no attack on marriage their

same sex couples have family you apparently don't want to protect

so you live in the real world but you don't seem to understand this aspect of it very well
 
Thought we had covered that, there isn't one. Nada, zilch, none...zero.

Never said it was, oh man of straw.

Never said that either oh man of second straw.

so its meaningless to mention it like you did
 
I never said that you have to specifically prove positive procreative ability, at least not on an individual basis.

However you are wrong, one of the issues for which marriage is a part of the solution is procreation. There was no reason to have checked in the past for positive procreative powers, it had already been confirmed since before written history in gender opposite couples... there was no need to make it a perquisite or state the obvious for the group... we have seven billion people on the planet as proof, I think we get how it works.

Legal requirements are the codification of our rules and requirements set down by our law makers to fit a culture for themselves. In England, in Chile, in Vietnam, each culture is different... they make up their own rules. As do we. All cultures have had legal marriages between males and females and why do you think this might be? If it were just for love, not for the creation of families requiring procreation, why would they not have had same sex couple marriages abundant in the past? Perhaps it was because there would be no lineal descendents issuing from such a barren situation and no need to establish legal claim? Another reason was to safeguard families from abandonment, establishing a legal bond between each parent and to the children... this is not really necessary as with couples not procreating children.

What are your facts on marriage... why was it established in your opinion...or can you tell me factually? What has it been for here in the United States? Solely to join two lovers?

And gender does actually affect the legal requirements if the legal requirements only allow different sex marriages, so you are wrong just on the face of it. My personal requirement? Are you serious, its been a national requirement that it be one man one woman, generally and universally understood to have procreative powers. Its your personal requirement that it doesn't have to be that way.

You cannot show how the marriage of a man to a tree will in anyway affect the stability of marriage, or of their saplings, either. You cannot show me anything of the sort regarding whether it same sex marriage hurts the institution of marriage or of children. You are simply prevaricating. For one thing, SSM has not been around long enough to have sufficient longitudinal studies... besides, who is conducting these studies, what were the metrics...

Takes a long long time to see if things work out for the better or worse. Example, the Head Start Program, so heralded by liberals. Its been around since LBJ and yet we just are finding out that for those going in at age 4, any gains are erased by first grade. Liberals just have such a poor record of improving much of anything.

you don't have to have kids to get married

you don't have to be able to have kids to get married

its obvious women over a certain age cant have kids naturally and they can get married

more family's would be raised by parents who are married if you had gay marriage according to you it would reduce poverty as well

no one is hindered from raising kids in a family with hetero sexual by gay marriage

therefore gay marriage is beneficial to marriage and family's and society and trying to stop it based on reproductive potential is an absurd double standard that's illegal do to the requirement of = protection under the law
 
Back
Top Bottom