• 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!

**BREAKING** U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Rule on Gay Marriage

You can call them RINO's all you want, but in the end the Republicans choose those so called "RINO's" to run. Your response is what Republicans say when they are embarrased what they have done.

Yeah the whole sentiment around dem vs repub is ridiculously confining. A republican voter (who is this forum's biggest gun nut) recently questioned how i can lean conservative for not wanting to train 8 year olds to use automatic weapons. This poster supports SSM. I'm like....wait a minute. Someone could dare to question his credentials as a conservative for that.

What does is it say about our inflexible thinking that we leave no room for nuance and it's a strict dichotomy of "republicans favor XYZ, dems favor ABC"? It's just being conformist as hell and playing right into the hands of the politicians, who want things kept nice and simple when it comes time to convince their base to show up on election day.
 
good thing on THIS issue neither of those things are happening lol
this is a WIN for rights, the constitution hasnt been circumvented (accept by the states being corrected for their error) and is less government

I love how you took something I said completely out of context and used it as your sig.... It really goes to show how mature you are and how much you want to ATTEMPT to destroy someone who disagrees with you... Which is what the typical progressive does...

I think it's too difficult for a progressive to interpret a quasi-complex idea and can only rationalize a post like a Dr. Seuss book.
 
all this time and you still dont get its not a states issue lol

The hell it's not.... Ever hear of DOMA???? who signed that? using your logic Clinton is a tyrant.

Even moreso there is absolutely NOTHING in the constitution that deals with marriage...

So yes this very much is a state constitution issue - if it wasn't congress would be all over it and would have never allowed prop 8 in the first place or votes on the issue in any state for that matter.
 
Well good governors sign legislation that they may not agree with as long as its the will of the people...

Also, a little OT here but I don't like the use of "gay marriage" "civil unions" seem more appropriate.

Oh, no. You can't say "civil unions", must be marriage. You see, homosexual couples could get all the rights of a marriage in a civil union, that would be comparatively easy to do. In fact, I can't believe that there would be much opposition at all. It must be forced down everyone's throat, regardless of the will of the people. Also, the dems need this issue, can't have these people focusing on other things.
 
I'm not opposed to civil unions, however the context within the US Constitution used to justify such a concept is amateur at best and downright stupid at times....

Basically there are a bunch of fools in judicial districts which of whom could give a rats ass what they're reading because the statues and amendments are quite clear - yet these pro-gay want these 3rd grade words redefined as if they're partaking in a common core class.
 
Oh, no. You can't say "civil unions", must be marriage. You see, homosexual couples could get all the rights of a marriage in a civil union, that would be comparatively easy to do. In fact, I can't believe that there would be much opposition at all. It must be forced down everyone's throat, regardless of the will of the people. Also, the dems need this issue, can't have these people focusing on other things.

I think the US government should get out of the marriage business all together, quite frankly.
 
Oh, no. You can't say "civil unions", must be marriage. You see, homosexual couples could get all the rights of a marriage in a civil union, that would be comparatively easy to do. In fact, I can't believe that there would be much opposition at all. It must be forced down everyone's throat, regardless of the will of the people. Also, the dems need this issue, can't have these people focusing on other things.

Yeah well dems wont be happy until 3/4th of the population is wiped out and we're all forced to live in trees and communes ..

I think most democrats have the morals and mentality of a 10th grader and look up to the successful tyrannical progressives that have actually made it in life using the capitalist model or just becoming famous for domestic terrorism. Which isn't surprising because 10th graders love defiance which is probably why many states are trying to lower the voting age to 17 to take advantage of that defiance and rage.
 
First off you said you were a democrat, and secondly I never even claimed to be a republican - the only remote and nice thing I said about republicans were that the ones my age are far different than the ones we presently have in the House and Senate.

I said I was a Dem many years ago. People change, as I did.

I have absolutely no issue with conservatives, some are just people who value religion and others view conservatism as defending our founding documents, but don't even confuse that with modern republicans (some of which are OK I suppose, as some democrats are ok) - my issue is with extremism, political correctness, elitism and those who actually believe it's the governments duty to treat grown adults and people with families that are doing just fine like they're children.

Sorry, but there are MANY conservatives that would love to control morality. They are not Republicans, they are conservatives. Remember the Federal Gay Marrriage ban that tried to happen under Bush? That had conservative support.

This government just needs to leave people and business' the **** alone....

That will never happen tho considering the fact our government is basically a Mafia.

Both the Dems and Republicans have made it that way.
 
Yeah the whole sentiment around dem vs repub is ridiculously confining. A republican voter (who is this forum's biggest gun nut) recently questioned how i can lean conservative for not wanting to train 8 year olds to use automatic weapons. This poster supports SSM. I'm like....wait a minute. Someone could dare to question his credentials as a conservative for that.

What does is it say about our inflexible thinking that we leave no room for nuance and it's a strict dichotomy of "republicans favor XYZ, dems favor ABC"? It's just being conformist as hell and playing right into the hands of the politicians, who want things kept nice and simple when it comes time to convince their base to show up on election day.

Correct, there is no lock, stock, mold for a conservative to be and there is not lock, stock, mold for a liberal to be. Not only that is there are tons of gray in between. One might say supporing SSM makes you a liberal, well it doesn't. There are Republicans that are gay that want SSM, but agree with almost everything else the Republicans do.

I remember hearing conservatives laugh at saying the Dems don't have a big tent, all the while calling others RINOs declaring them NOT conservatives. And I'm not saying the Dems or liberals are any better. Just try and be a complete 2A supporter to some and they will call you conservtive.

Bottom line is I don't see the authority those that call others DINOS and RINOS have to do such a thing.
 
Yeah well dems wont be happy until 3/4th of the population is wiped out and we're all forced to live in trees and communes ..

Can you show any more hyperbole, gimme a break. Since you like hyperbole, howe about this one. Republicans won't be happy unless 3/4 of the population is dead from pollution since they hate the EPA.

I think most democrats have the morals and mentality of a 10th grader and look up to the successful tyrannical progressives that have actually made it in life using the capitalist model or just becoming famous for domestic terrorism. Which isn't surprising because 10th graders love defiance which is probably why many states are trying to lower the voting age to 17 to take advantage of that defiance and rage.

I love it when a Republican supporter tries and nail the Dems on morality while ignoring the Republicans. Is that why when there is a GOP convention, the revenues of prostitution and strip clubs go up? Gimme a break. The Republicans like to get on their soapbox screaming how people need to be more moral, all the while didling under-age interns and going to prostitutes and strip clubs. No, I don't think the Dems are any better, but I don't put them on soapboxes of morality either.
 
1.)I love how you took something I said completely out of context and used it as your sig....
2.)It really goes to show how mature you are
3.) and how much you want to ATTEMPT to destroy someone who disagrees with you... Which is what the typical progressive does...
4.)I think it's too difficult for a progressive to interpret a quasi-complex idea and can only rationalize a post like a Dr. Seuss book.

1.) its not out of context at all lol
2.) your views have nothing to do with others maturity levels
3a.) what "opinions" do we disagree on I dont even know
3b.) your posts do this already lol
4a.) not a progressive
5b.) failed insults wont help your failed posts they just further expose them LMAO
 
1.)The hell it's not.... Ever hear of DOMA???? who signed that? using your logic Clinton is a tyrant.
2.)Even moreso there is absolutely NOTHING in the constitution that deals with marriage...
3.)So yes this very much is a state constitution issue - if it wasn't congress would be all over it and would have never allowed prop 8 in the first place or votes on the issue in any state for that matter.

1.) sorry rights, laws, and court cases all disagree with you. Read up on current events
2.) correct, which is meaningless, good thing this is about equal rights
3.) false see #1
facts win again
 
You see, homosexual couples could get all the rights of a marriage in a civil union, that would be comparatively easy to do. In fact, I can't believe that there would be much opposition at all. It must be forced down everyone's throat, regardless of the will of the people. Also, the dems need this issue, can't have these people focusing on other things.

no matter how many times this lie is posted it will never be true lol
 
Oh, no. You can't say "civil unions", must be marriage. You see, homosexual couples could get all the rights of a marriage in a civil union, that would be comparatively easy to do. In fact, I can't believe that there would be much opposition at all. It must be forced down everyone's throat, regardless of the will of the people. Also, the dems need this issue, can't have these people focusing on other things.

Here's the thing: People like you opposed civil unions anyway. The "offer" of civil unions was never legitimate. Numerous states even implemented constitutional bans against civil unions. You can't believe there would be much opposition? You haven't been paying attention.

I love how you guys always regurgitate the "forced down our throats" phrasing. Didn't you ever ponder the symbolism there? By the way, nothing is being forced upon you. You don't have to marry a dude, you don't have to go to a gay wedding, nobody gives a crap whether you personally approve or not, quit being so dramatic.
 
Here's the thing: People like you opposed civil unions anyway. The "offer" of civil unions was never legitimate. Numerous states even implemented constitutional bans against civil unions. You can't believe there would be much opposition? You haven't been paying attention.

I love how you guys always regurgitate the "forced down our throats" phrasing. Didn't you ever ponder the symbolism there? By the way, nothing is being forced upon you. You don't have to marry a dude, you don't have to go to a gay wedding, nobody gives a crap whether you personally approve or not, quit being so dramatic.

another factually accurate and basic common sense post that will be ignored. Nobody honest, educated and unbiased is silly enough to think civil unions are equal to marriage or that there isnt HUGE resistance to them too.
 
Can you show any more hyperbole, gimme a break. Since you like hyperbole, howe about this one. Republicans won't be happy unless 3/4 of the population is dead from pollution since they hate the EPA.

I love it when a Republican supporter tries and nail the Dems on morality while ignoring the Republicans. Is that why when there is a GOP convention, the revenues of prostitution and strip clubs go up? Gimme a break. The Republicans like to get on their soapbox screaming how people need to be more moral, all the while didling under-age interns and going to prostitutes and strip clubs. No, I don't think the Dems are any better, but I don't put them on soapboxes of morality either.

I've said it elsewhere, but the reason I left the Republican Party was because I was tired of the hypocrisy. If Republicans were true conservatives, that is they believe in individual liberty and oppose government involvement in our private lives, then everything would be fine. Where the Republican Party runs into their problem is that they have a lot of religious folks under that tent that bring up force Reps to be against SSM and Pro-Life. Remove the religious element, and you have a Republican party I could be a part of. Or just be a Libertarian since that's ultimately what a Conservative without a religious bent is as far as I see it...
 
Here's the thing: People like you opposed civil unions anyway. The "offer" of civil unions was never legitimate. Numerous states even implemented constitutional bans against civil unions. You can't believe there would be much opposition? You haven't been paying attention.

I love how you guys always regurgitate the "forced down our throats" phrasing. Didn't you ever ponder the symbolism there? By the way, nothing is being forced upon you. You don't have to marry a dude, you don't have to go to a gay wedding, nobody gives a crap whether you personally approve or not, quit being so dramatic.

another factually accurate and basic common sense post that will be ignored. Nobody honest, educated and unbiased is silly enough to think civil unions are equal to marriage or that there isnt HUGE resistance to them too.

Am I the only one reminded of "Separate but Equal" when they think of civil unions?
 
I said I was a Dem many years ago. People change, as I did.



Sorry, but there are MANY conservatives that would love to control morality. They are not Republicans, they are conservatives. Remember the Federal Gay Marrriage ban that tried to happen under Bush? That had conservative support.



Both the Dems and Republicans have made it that way.

I'm sure there are some authoritarian republicans, however that doesn't change the fact that democrats and progressives are ALL authoritarian.

However, I don't think conservatives would really try to force their ideology on you unless the ideas were outlined in the constitution, besides it's not like nutty conservatives have ever been able to actually legislate their authoritarian ideas - most of which are religious related.... However democrats have been legislating their moonbat authoritarian rule at the sate and even federal level for the past 150 years..... Lets not forget who the lynchers were, lets not forget the dems that ignored the Bill of Rights and skipped due process just to lynch a man - lets not forget how religiously fanatical democrats were in the south and even created "dry" counties and forbid the sale of liquor on Sundays because they were Baptists - and now for some strange reason democrats and progressives have the audacity to blame their screwed up behavior on republicans and conservatives. Of course lets not least forget about segregation..

I could write a book on how screwed up the democrat party was between 1870 and the present and how they love to blame their past on republicans - the real "social justice" warriors and how democrats did everything in their power to block every attempt they made at racial and gender equality..

Sorry but progress can be good and bad.
 
I've said it elsewhere, but the reason I left the Republican Party was because I was tired of the hypocrisy. If Republicans were true conservatives, that is they believe in individual liberty and oppose government involvement in our private lives, then everything would be fine. Where the Republican Party runs into their problem is that they have a lot of religious folks under that tent that bring up force Reps to be against SSM and Pro-Life. Remove the religious element, and you have a Republican party I could be a part of. Or just be a Libertarian since that's ultimately what a Conservative without a religious bent is as far as I see it...

Bolded part is exactly why I call first began to call myself a Libertarian. I'm a Conservative without religion. I admittedly vote Republican most of the time but I will vote for the person over the party every day. Just has to be the right person. Not all Libertarians are the right person either.
 
I've said it elsewhere, but the reason I left the Republican Party was because I was tired of the hypocrisy. If Republicans were true conservatives, that is they believe in individual liberty and oppose government involvement in our private lives, then everything would be fine. Where the Republican Party runs into their problem is that they have a lot of religious folks under that tent that bring up force Reps to be against SSM and Pro-Life. Remove the religious element, and you have a Republican party I could be a part of. Or just be a Libertarian since that's ultimately what a Conservative without a religious bent is as far as I see it...

Not even that, really. Republicans talk about smaller government and less spending all the time, but when was the last time a Republican actually accomplished that? Reagan ballooned spending and deficits, even supported, *gasp* gun control. Bush Sr got us a bunch of that horrifying, job-killing, socialist cap and trade implemented. And let's not discuss the PATRIOT act.
 
1.) sorry rights, laws, and court cases all disagree with you. Read up on current events
2.) correct, which is meaningless, good thing this is about equal rights
3.) false see #1
facts win again

Sorry do you just want to believe what you want to believe??

Was it a republican that spewed DOMA?

Was it republicans that mourned the loss of former KKK member and Dixicrat Strom Thurmond who only flipped republican because he thought his once racist party was pandering to minorities?

Sorry to tell you that republicans hated that guy and democrats loved him - that alone shows how ****ed up politics really are.

Oh and BTW, nothing I say is "false" you just want to believe what you think is true..
 
U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Rule on Gay Marriage - Bloomberg



The SCOTUS has ruled they will leave it up to the states to decide and will not take up a nationwide ruling on same sex marriage. This means that lower court ruling will stay in place unless challenged in the future. No federal ruling of marriage is in the near future....

They have not left it up to the states to decide. The lower courts infringed on the states' rights and SCOTUS allowed that infringement to stand by refusing the writ of certiorari. I believe in the sanctity of the sovereign state. (Frankly, I personally believe states should allow gay marriage, but it should not be up to the Feds to decide). This was not a victory for states rights.
 
Not even that, really. Republicans talk about smaller government and less spending all the time, but when was the last time a Republican actually accomplished that? Reagan ballooned spending and deficits, even supported, *gasp* gun control. Bush Sr got us a bunch of that horrifying, job-killing, socialist cap and trade implemented. And let's not discuss the PATRIOT act.

People talk about Reagan and try to equate him to today's out of control spending, but that is just being ignorant of the times. He wasn't expanding the reach of the Federal Government by getting involved in private lives and putting welfare programs on steroids, he expanded and (more importantly) modernized the military to serve as a counterpoint to the Soviet Union (which by the way, where are they today?). Had Saddam not invaded Kuwait, we would of began a draw down of the military soon after the Berlin Wall fell.

And when it came to Reagan on gun control or Bush Jr with the Patriot Act, you have to take into consideration the context of the times. Drug crime was rampant back in the 80's and there was a call to action. After 9/11 where 3000 people died due to 19 hijackers on airplanes, there was a call to action. This is probably where Libertarians and Conservatives differ come to think of it; Conservatives are willing to expand the government in the event of national emergencies, where Libertarians are not as knee jerky.

I'll be honest, I didn't know of the Cap and Trade thing though, glad it wasn't passed.
 
Back
Top Bottom