• 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!

Gay marriage, once inconceivable, now appears inevitable

True law can never condone such disgusting behavior. The documents which do so and purport to be laws are only corruptions of law, and no one is bound to obey them.

Actually, this is nothing but your opinion, a meaningless and irrelevant post. Let me demonstrate:

1) Since it is not disgusting behavior, your post is irrelevant.
2) Since true law is the law... and the law in many places is that SSM is legal, your post is irrelevant.
3) Since you are bound to obey the law or face the consequences, your post is irrelevant.

That was easy.
 
Unless they don't want to suffer the consequences of violating the law.




"Tolerance is giving to every other human being every right that you claim for yourself." ~ Robert Green Ingersoll

The consequences of violating real laws are much much worse.
 
Really? So if Obama decides he doesn't like tanning establishments, he can have them all closed down and there's nothing the owners could do about it in court because they never had the right to open those businesses in the first place? That's what you believe?

No. Mainly because the people would not approve of such an act just because. However, if some movement came along and gained enough popularity to show how harmful tanning salons were, gaining enough votes to outlaw them, then yes, the government (not just a single person in government, but a majority) could close down all tanning establishments, and there would be nothing the owners could do about it.

How many legally operating opium dens do you see today in the US?
 
That too. I don't recall anything in the Constitution that grants us the right to demand service from any business.

There is also nothing written into the Constitution that grants us the right to operate a business, sell goods or services to the public with advantages given through public services, either. That is why it is all going to be balancing of unwritten rights of some to unwritten rights of others.
 
I believe the legal term is "compelling state interest".

I think private clubs are allowed to exclude "customers" based on those categories.

What compelling interest would that be?

Clubs like the KKK? That isn't a business, but it does raise the point of whiners here coming across as defending that kind of hatred.
 
Unless they don't want to suffer the consequences of violating the law.

As if he's in the position to deny marriage licenses...actually that sounds like a perfect opportunity to prove his theory correct: Go to a county clerk's office in say virginia and try to block same sex couples from getting married and see how quickly he gets arrested and how few join in on his pathetic 'cause'
 
The consequences of violating real laws are much much worse.

I assume you mean religious our moral laws, but no one is asking YOU to violate any such law. All the 'fake' laws require is if you own a business, you provide goods or services to them like you do the other sinners on earth, which is all of us and you.
 
I assume you mean religious our moral laws, but no one is asking YOU to violate any such law. All the 'fake' laws require is if you own a business, you provide goods or services to them like you do the other sinners on earth, which is all of us and you.

And these "goods and services" can include things which celebrate their disordered conduct, as in the case of the wedding cake maker.
 
And these "goods and services" can include things which celebrate their disordered conduct, as in the case of the wedding cake maker.
Do you mean the wedding cake maker who accepted an order to make a cake with a green pentagram on it for a coven to celebrate the solstice? Or was it the one who made a wedding cake for a dog wedding?
 
Do you mean the wedding cake maker who accepted an order to make a cake with a green pentagram on it for a coven to celebrate the solstice? Or was it the one who made a wedding cake for a dog wedding?

I'm not going to play this game.
 
I'm not going to play this game.

You don't like the hypocrisy of their so-called 'sincere religious beliefs' being pointed out?
 
The consequences of violating real laws are much much worse.

That's your opinion and nothing more. Hope you will enjoy having SSM legalized. It's people like you whom I toast each time a state recognizes SSM.
 
That's your opinion and nothing more. Hope you will enjoy having SSM legalized. It's people like you whom I toast each time a state recognizes SSM.

There is no such thing as same sex marriage. It can no more be legalized than square circles.
 
And these "goods and services" can include things which celebrate their disordered conduct, as in the case of the wedding cake maker.

Yet those bakers compromise their values for baking cakes for dog weddings and in one case did a pentagram on a cake. Face facts, they compromised their values for money except in the case for a gay wedding.

They were shown to be the hypocrites they really are, like most bible thumpers that stand on the "holier-than-thou" soapbox.
 
There is no such thing as same sex marriage. It can no more be legalized than square circles.

Yes, there is. You can continue to stomp your feet and throw a tantrum, but there is AND it is legal. Deal with it.
 
As the Supreme Court prepares to decide the future of same-sex marriage--an institution described as "newer than cellphones or the internet by one justice last year--two things are clear.
Despite this year's breathtaking string of lower court victories, the battle for marriage equality hasn't been swift or easy. To the lawyers who devised the legal strategy decades ago, the journey has been arduous, the setbacks plentiful, and the battle scars deep.

And even after the high court rules--most likely striking down state bans on gay marriage at the end of its term in June--the fight won't be over. Another clash looms over the issue of religious freedom.

Read the article here: Gay marriage, once inconceivable, now appears inevitable

It looks like this battle has reached an important point.I don't believe that the 1st Amendment will stop this from happening.

Churches will be able to do what they want to do, but businesses will have to obey the law whether they like it or not.

Businesses should be able to hire whomever they want.
 
Most bible thumpers don't like to play this game because it points out their hypocrisy.

I don't believe opposition to gay marriage in some cases has anything to do with "bible thumping."

Some gays are just way too flamboyant for me to tolerate.....

Not to mention I don't like the fact that some gays think they can just do whatever the hell they want even if it's not socially acceptable just because they're "gay" hence in their mind they're a "protected class."
 
Yes, we should return to the 1950s with "white only" restaraunts. :roll:

I wouldn't go that far - that is just illogical, however if a business wanted to do that then they should be able to.

There are plenty of "black only restaurants" and there are plenty of black owned businesses who only hire blacks, some Mexican and Asian restaurants do the same.
 
I don't believe opposition to gay marriage in some cases has anything to do with "bible thumping."

Sure it does, it is the MAIN reason that is given for being against it. Now is everyone that is anti-SSM a bible thumper? Nope, but the majority are.

Some gays are just way too flamboyant for me to tolerate.....

And some bible thumpers are way too "in your face" for me too. But I don't go around making it illegal for them to get married.

Not to mention I don't like the fact that some gays think they can just do whatever the hell they want even if it's not socially acceptable just because they're "gay" hence in their mind they're a "protected class."

Just like some heterosexuals do in MArdi Gras, at bars, etc. There are always those who are bad apples in a group. That isn't the majority of gays though. Just like some bible-thumpers stand on street corners, get in your face with psalms, etc.
 
I wouldn't go that far - that is just illogical, however if a business wanted to do that then they should be able to.

There are plenty of "black only restaurants" and there are plenty of black owned businesses who only hire blacks, some Mexican and Asian restaurants do the same.

Please show me a restaraunt that disciminates against whites and only allows blacks inside. Go right ahead.
 
Sure it does, it is the MAIN reason that is given for being against it. Now is everyone that is anti-SSM a bible thumper? Nope, but the majority are.



And some bible thumpers are way too "in your face" for me too. But I don't go around making it illegal for them to get married.



Just like some heterosexuals do in MArdi Gras, at bars, etc. There are always those who are bad apples in a group. That isn't the majority of gays though. Just like some bible-thumpers stand on street corners, get in your face with psalms, etc.

You need a lot to learn about freedom and even "bible thumpers"

You do realize those "bible thumpers" are usually Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses and I don't like their aggressive behavior either.

As far as service - why is it OK for blacks to turn whites away or Mexicans to turn whites away or Asians to turn whites away for jobs....

Why should a company that receives a government contract be forced to meet a racial quota? - hell my dad had to put his business in my moms name just to get a government contract due to racial and sex quotas...

Furthermore who the **** does the government think it is telling businesses who they can and cannot hire?
 
Please show me a restaraunt that disciminates against whites and only allows blacks inside. Go right ahead.

Go to every black urban area in the United States or any black suburb in the United States.....

You ever go to a soul food restaurant and have a white server? I think not...
 
Back
Top Bottom