• 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!

Indiana won't recognize same-sex marriages

Lursa said:
That's what I wrote...that it applies to both. Good Lord.

:doh :doh :doh
Click to expand...

Don't lie, especially when what you wrote is quoted right above my post. Here it is again:

Quote Originally Posted by Lursa

And most people dont care. We dont care if you agree. Think whatever you want, just dont expect other people to have to conform to what you agree or disagree with.
Click to expand...
 
Lursa said:
And most people dont care. We dont care if you agree. Think whatever you want, just dont expect other people to have to conform to what you agree or disagree with.

Your disagreement effects the marriages of gay couples as much as gay marriage affects straight marriages. Get it?
Click to expand...


Just remember the silent majority as well as the SCOTUS is yet to be heard.
 
Navy Pride said:
OK lets just say a very huge majority do. You can't question that.
Click to expand...

The point is, it does not matter. It does not factor in the definition NOR right to marry at all.

You dont even have to marry to procreate and lots of people choose that as well.
 
clownboy said:
Don't lie, especially when what you wrote is quoted right above my post. Here it is again:
Click to expand...

This is what I wrote:

Lursa said:
And most people dont care. We dont care if you agree. Think whatever you want, just dont expect other people to have to conform to what you agree or disagree with.

Your disagreement effects the marriages of gay couples as much as gay marriage affects straight marriages. Get it?
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to humiliate you here...you are managing that yourself. I am just clarifying what I wrote.

Let me know if you need it broken down any further. Maybe a pm would be less embarrassing?
 
Navy Pride said:
Actually that 50% figure is in error when you add all the young people who get divorces or have the marriages annuled.
Click to expand...


So you are saying it's greater than 50? Adding young people that get divorces and marriages that are annuled would make the figure go UP.


You aren't supporting your position.





(And don't you think that the divorce of young people is already included?)


>>>>
 
Lursa said:
The point is, it does not matter. It does not factor in the definition NOR right to marry at all.

You dont even have to marry to procreate and lots of people choose that as well.
Click to expand...

no body is denying that you can procreate outside of marriage and when the people break up which usually happens in shack ups the kid is in the middle with no legal rights.
 
Navy Pride said:
Just remember the silent majority as well as the SCOTUS is yet to be heard.
Click to expand...


SSCM WON in the last four ballot initiatives on the issue during general elections.



>>>>
 
WorldWatcher said:
So you are saying it's greater than 50? Adding young people that get divorces and marriages that are annuled would make the figure go UP.


You aren't supporting your position.





(And don't you think that the divorce of young people is already included?)


>>>>
Click to expand...

Its already up if kids in their teens get married my left wing friend. throw them out of the equation and the divorce rate is much lower.
 
Lursa said:
This is what I wrote:



I'm not trying to humiliate you here...you are managing that yourself. I am just clarifying what I wrote.

Let me know if you need it broken down any further. Maybe a pm would be less embarrassing?
Click to expand...

For you perhaps. But this has nothing to do with my post or your reply. The fact that you disagree with NP or anyone else does not put the onus on them to conform to what you agree with.
 
Navy Pride said:
They aren't gays who are doing it.
Click to expand...

Of course they are procreating outside of marriage. Until recently, they had no choice.

They still created families, with both biological and adopted, step, etc kids.
 
Lursa said:
Of course they are procreating outside of marriage. Until recently, they had no choice.

They still created families, with both biological and adopted, step, etc kids.
Click to expand...

You can't sidestep that in order to procreate outside of the laboratory homosexuals must put aside being homosexual, at least temporarily.
 
Navy Pride said:
Laugh all you want but you know its true.
Click to expand...

No, you are the one who desires to 'narrow' the definition of marriage to a man and a woman (or keep it that way). Including gays 'broadens' it.

Hence my laughing at you claiming including gays in marriage is the product of narrowmindedness.
 
clownboy said:
You can't sidestep that in order to procreate outside of the laboratory homosexuals must put aside being homosexual, at least temporarily.
Click to expand...

Who cares? Straight couples produce kids in lots of manners as well, doesnt invalidate their marriages.

And gays dont need labs or 'setting aside their orientation' to have kids naturally. It's an act, period. They've been doing it since...um, forever.
 
Navy Pride said:
Try and keep up, I know its difficult for you. of course people procreate outside of marriage but gays sure as hell don't.
Click to expand...

Yes they do invetro fertilization. I think you need to keep up there my liberal friend.

And since procreation is not a requirement for marriage, your points are useless and meaningless.
 
Navy Pride said:
Just remember the silent majority as well as the SCOTUS is yet to be heard.
Click to expand...

If they remain 'silent' on this is it only out of embarrassment from being seen as bigots.

There are almost no states left to resist so it's pretty silly to see you writing this.
 
Lursa said:
Who cares? Straight couples produce kids in lots of manners as well, doesnt invalidate their marriages.

And gays dont need labs or 'setting aside their orientation' to have kids naturally. It's an act, period. They've been doing it since...um, forever.
Click to expand...

Interesting reply and nonsense to avoid that you got caught being wrong again and you know it. You assert one thing and when proven wrong you move those goalposts.

As to that last, laughable. If it's just an act they can conveniently give up, then problem solved, give it up.
 
Navy Pride said:
Actually that 50% figure is in error when you add all the young people who get divorces or have the marriages annuled.
Click to expand...

It's sad that you are struggling so hard to prove me wrong, that that is what is more important to you than your actual stance on the issue. What parts of "Nearly 50% of all marriages end in divorce. Not half, but close." didnt you understand?

Not only that, what you wrote seems to show that it's more than 50%, not less. Are you sure you know what you are doing here?
 
Navy Pride said:
no body is denying that you can procreate outside of marriage and when the people break up which usually happens in shack ups the kid is in the middle with no legal rights.
Click to expand...

And what I have pointed out before and people completely ignore is that yes....gays have families and kids. Being married provides many more benefits and protections for those children under the umbrella of marriage, including custody and divorce.

SSM protects MORE children.
 
Navy Pride said:
Its already up if kids in their teens get married my left wing friend. throw them out of the equation and the divorce rate is much lower.
Click to expand...

#1 I'm not left wing, I've been a member of the GOP since 1978.

#2 So, you want to use a left wing tactic - instead of dealing with reality - let's "cook" the numbers to meet an objective. In this case you want to show that 50% or so marriages don't end, by throwing out a demographic of those whose marriages end. Not an honest tactic.



>>>>
 
clownboy said:
For you perhaps. But this has nothing to do with my post or your reply. The fact that you disagree with NP or anyone else does not put the onus on them to conform to what you agree with.
Click to expand...

You decided to 'tell me' that it's a 'two way street.' For some odd reason, since that is ***exactly what I wrote.***

And then proceeded to backpeddle for pages. Ego: not doing you any favors.

Now you are making up stuff to try and divert from the actual simplicity of my initial post? Dont go adding more to it than was intended just to bolster yourself.
 
clownboy said:
Interesting reply and nonsense to avoid that you got caught being wrong again and you know it. You assert one thing and when proven wrong you move those goalposts.

As to that last, laughable. If it's just an act they can conveniently give up, then problem solved, give it up.
Click to expand...

Where was I wrong: please be specific.

And people can do the act of homicide anytime too. Why dont they?

Having sex and being gay are two different things. Someone can be gay and never have sex. THere have been gays in straight marriages, producing kids, for centuries. Mostly out of social expectations.

So, please specify where I was wrong. Go:
 
clownboy said:
Show your work. This decision was judicial, not electoral.
Click to expand...


A no, they were at the ballot box, it was not a judicial decision. 2012, 4 States with SS Marriage issue on the ballot in the general election. In each case the Marriage Equality side won.


Maine Same-Sex Marriage Question, Question 1 (2012) - Ballotpedia
Maryland Same-Sex Civil Marriage Referendum, Question 6 (2012) - Ballotpedia
Washington Same-Sex Marriage Veto Referendum, Referendum 74 (2012) - Ballotpedia
Minnesota Same-Sex Marriage Amendment, Amendment 1 (2012) - Ballotpedia



>>>>
 
Lursa said:
And what I have pointed out before and people completely ignore is that yes....gays have families and kids. Being married provides many more benefits and protections for those children under the umbrella of marriage, including custody and divorce.



SSM protects MORE children.
Click to expand...

We are going around in circles here...........again marriage provides a much stable life style for a child...........Gays can not procreate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom