• 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 Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287:411]

re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
Are you saying that homosexuals define themselves entirely by their sex acts? Well, now that you mention it, I guess they do.
Click to expand...

No they don't and I didn't say that at all. I guess that is the problem with this kind of bigotry they just don't see homosexuals as humans.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
Certainly the argument implied by his statement.
Click to expand...

ONly to bigots who don't see homosexuals as humans........so can I assume you want them all dead? Why do you want to kill all homosexuals?
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
Certainly the argument implied by his statement.
Click to expand...

More like the argument you wished to read from his statement. Not the argument made when taken in context.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

roguenuke said:
More like the argument you wished to read from his statement. Not the argument made when taken in context.
Click to expand...

I can't recall any way it has ever been illegal to "be oneself" unless one defines "oneself" by virtue of their sexual activity and that sexual activity is, at the time, illegal.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Sababa said:
No they don't and I didn't say that at all. I guess that is the problem with this kind of bigotry they just don't see homosexuals as humans.
Click to expand...

Again, the REALLY stupid strawman. Or is it so far out in left field that it's just a really stupid non sequitur?
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
Again, the REALLY stupid strawman. Or is it so far out in left field that it's just a really stupid non sequitur?
Click to expand...

Which is exactly what you did. In no way did I reduce homosexual to their sexuality.
Now explain to me why you thought that?
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Sababa said:
Which is exactly what you did. In no way did I reduce homosexual to their sexuality.
Now explain to me why you thought that?
Click to expand...

I already explained it. If your claim is that sodomy laws make it illegal for homosexuals to "be themselves", then you are defining "themselves" by their sodomy. And the really strange thing is that this isn't strange. It's not strange because homosexuals do that to themselves. The only people in the world that I know of that define themselves primarily by their sexual behavior is the GLBT community. Your post merely reinforced that.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
I already explained it. If your claim is that sodomy laws make it illegal for homosexuals to "be themselves", then you are defining "themselves" by their sodomy. And the really strange thing is that this isn't strange. It's not strange because homosexuals do that to themselves. The only people in the world that I know of that define themselves primarily by their sexual behavior is the GLBT community. Your post merely reinforced that.
Click to expand...

Oh I don't think you could possibly be that dumb. There were laws against being homosexual......that is an attraction. How they expressed it was through loving relationships. Sex is only part of that. Being oneself is to show their love openly just as heterosexuals do. Or are you saying every time you introduce your spouse you are defining yourself by your sexuality? This is a stupid bigoted approach by the people who don't see gay people as fully human. One's sexuality is part of who they are, forcing some people not to be able to express it publicly (which is not sex but sexuality which includes flirting, love, hand-holding, etc. _) is a crime against humanity. You deserve to be in Den Hague.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

roguenuke said:
Many of us have known all along that all same sex marriage bans were unconstitutional. Basically, Scalia pointed out what was true but he himself could not see the actual logic in the ruling of Windsor. Windsor gives these judges a case to reference here, but it isn't the reason those bans are unconstitutional. That reference is important in at least some of those states because some states simply have too many people that oppose same sex marriage still (despite that support decreasing every day).

But just because a ruling can be referenced in foreseeable future cases, does not make the ruling wrong. That is where Scalia's "logic" fails.
Click to expand...

Actually, Scalia knew full well what Windsor meant. He said as much in his dissent.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
I already explained it. If your claim is that sodomy laws make it illegal for homosexuals to "be themselves", then you are defining "themselves" by their sodomy. And the really strange thing is that this isn't strange. It's not strange because homosexuals do that to themselves. The only people in the world that I know of that define themselves primarily by their sexual behavior is the GLBT community. Your post merely reinforced that.
Click to expand...

It's easy to understand if you turn it around, i.e. if heterosexual sex were outlawed. While heterosexuals would not define themselves by the sex they have, outlawing heterosexual sex would in fact make it illegal for heterosexuals to be themselves.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
I can't recall any way it has ever been illegal to "be oneself" unless one defines "oneself" by virtue of their sexual activity and that sexual activity is, at the time, illegal.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, many times people did not have to be caught having sex or even proven to have been having sex to get charged with having had sex. Just being in a same sex intimate relationship was enough to warrant the assumption that it involved sex. Even you are making that assumption that sex is involved just because a person is involved in a same sex intimate relationship. It certainly did not require proof of sexual activity with a person of the same sex to get a person committed for being homosexual in the past. All it took was either a confession of the attraction or evidence that the person had the attractions and might be willing to act on those.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Deuce said:
Actually, Scalia knew full well what Windsor meant. He said as much in his dissent.
Click to expand...

Oh he knew what was meant, he simply did not want to accept that the logic given for Windsor was sound for why it violated the Constitution, due mainly to his personal beliefs.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
I already explained it. If your claim is that sodomy laws make it illegal for homosexuals to "be themselves", then you are defining "themselves" by their sodomy. And the really strange thing is that this isn't strange. It's not strange because homosexuals do that to themselves. The only people in the world that I know of that define themselves primarily by their sexual behavior is the GLBT community. Your post merely reinforced that.
Click to expand...

Sodomy laws were not the only things used against homosexuals in the past, even our own history. Prior to its removal as a mental disorder, homosexuality could be used to commit a person involuntarily without any evidence that they were actually having sex with someone of the same sex.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

roguenuke said:
Oh he knew what was meant, he simply did not want to accept that the logic given for Windsor was sound for why it violated the Constitution, due mainly to his personal beliefs.
Click to expand...

Right. That's why he was whining. I mean "dissenting." His rants in decisions about homosexuality are always entertaining. Ironically, his dissents have just served to provide more ammunition for the equality side.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Cardinal said:
It's easy to understand if you turn it around, i.e. if heterosexual sex were outlawed. While heterosexuals would not define themselves by the sex they have, outlawing heterosexual sex would in fact make it illegal for heterosexuals to be themselves.
Click to expand...

I see. So why don't people engaged in other behaviors that are outlawed self-identify primarily by their illegal behavior? I've never yet seen a "tax cheat pride parade" and be SO damned proud they try to claim their behavior on the same level as "race".
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

roguenuke said:
Sodomy laws were not the only things used against homosexuals in the past, even our own history. Prior to its removal as a mental disorder, homosexuality could be used to commit a person involuntarily without any evidence that they were actually having sex with someone of the same sex.
Click to expand...

So what does that have to do with the fact that homosexuals identify themselves principally by their sexual behavior? I was just noting that they're the only group of people that identify themselves first and foremost by their sexual behavior and secondly as anything else. It's not like they're just normal, ordinary people just like everyone else that merely enjoys same sex intimacy. No, they're first and foremost, people who have sex with people of the same sex. Everything else that "is them" is an afterthought.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
I can't recall any way it has ever been illegal to "be oneself" unless one defines "oneself" by virtue of their sexual activity and that sexual activity is, at the time, illegal.
Click to expand...

Someone is gay whether or not they ever have sex.

They *are defined* by society as gay because they are attracted to the same gender the way you, presumably, are attracted to the opposite gender. They merely recognize who they are but can only live the same life as you do, out in society with a partner and family (instead of hidden) by being subjected to others recognizing it.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
I see. So why don't people engaged in other behaviors that are outlawed self-identify primarily by their illegal behavior? I've never yet seen a "tax cheat pride parade" and be SO damned proud they try to claim their behavior on the same level as "race".
Click to expand...

Point is, would you, at least in some part, self identify according to your practice of heterosexual sex were it made illegal? Remember the key difference here is that unlike gay people, your sexual practices are not a point of contention.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
I already explained it. If your claim is that sodomy laws make it illegal for homosexuals to "be themselves", then you are defining "themselves" by their sodomy. And the really strange thing is that this isn't strange. It's not strange because homosexuals do that to themselves. The only people in the world that I know of that define themselves primarily by their sexual behavior is the GLBT community. Your post merely reinforced that.
Click to expand...

How do sodomy laws affect lesbians?

And most straight men define almost everything in their lives by their orientation as well...just about everything they do....is focused on getting or impressing the opposite sex or having sex. Certainly a good part of their daily life is focused there, even if they cant always act on it. :)

Society is just so used to it that we dont even think about it.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
So what does that have to do with the fact that homosexuals identify themselves principally by their sexual behavior?
Click to expand...

I already addressed this. It's their activities that are being made a point of controversy, and not yours.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Lursa said:
Someone is gay whether or not they ever have sex.

They *are defined* by society as gay because they are attracted to the same gender the way you, presumably, are attracted to the opposite gender. They merely recognize who they are but can only live the same life as you do, out in society with a partner and family (instead of hidden) by being subjected to others recognizing it.
Click to expand...

They can keep their personal business to themselves. My former fishing buddy was a very large and very tough woman living in a long term relationship with another woman in a home they shared with a business they shared doing hair. They were active in politics in one of the most liberal towns in one of the most liberal counties of one of the most liberal states (Connecticut) and never once did I hear her make an issue of her sexuality. She was just my fishing partner and a politician. Whatever her sexual preference, she wasn't first and foremost a lesbian, homosexual or any other label of sexual behavior. No one cared what the nature of their relationship was and nothing about it was "hidden". They just kept their personal business their feckin' personal business, as personal business SHOULD be.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Redress said:
Nicely written ruling, makes frequent reference to Loving, stating that prior to Loving, there was no history and tradition of marriage between races, so trying to claim tradition here fails.
Click to expand...

So in addition to being an immoral leftist, the judge is also an incorrigible moron.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Cardinal said:
I already addressed this. It's their activities that are being made a point of controversy, and not yours.
Click to expand...

I don't see that as a reason to identify oneself primarily by ones sexual behavior. It reduces those who do that to nothing BUT that.
 
re: Judge strikes down Wisconsin gay marriage ban[W:287]

Papa bull said:
I see. So why don't people engaged in other behaviors that are outlawed self-identify primarily by their illegal behavior? I've never yet seen a "tax cheat pride parade" and be SO damned proud they try to claim their behavior on the same level as "race".
Click to expand...

What about when it was illegal to sit at the front of the bus or use a certain water fountain?

What about when women werent allowed to vote?

How do you think they gained those rights? To be treated equally and not as 2nd class citizens?

They used protests, civil demonstrations, marches, speeches, etc. It sure made alot of people uncomfortable. People were hanged, women were hosed with fire hoses.

Too bad, people are entitled to equal treatment under the law. Dont like it? Too bad, why should they be ashamed of who they are? Too bad, there's no right to not be offended.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom