• 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!

South Carolina Supreme Court Halts Same-Sex Marriage Licenses

AGENT J said:
Wow your country sounds terrible, im glad thats not happening here in the US, you should try to move here if you can!
Click to expand...

obviously that's just the leftist hive mind talking :mrgreen:
 
blarg said:
so not gay marriage

not actually happening


not actually happening

sounds very familiar
Click to expand...

Yes, it's actually happening. Try reading something beside this dump.
 
AGENT J said:
Wow your country sounds terrible, im glad thats not happening here in the US, you should try to move here if you can!
Click to expand...

Well, I know Pittsburgh is not representative of the rest of the US (especially since other cities have real football teams) but it's hardly a different country.
 
it's just me said:
Yes, it's actually happening. Try reading something beside this dump.
Click to expand...

your aloud to say your against gay marriage and to say what you want

if your referring to people not being aloud to discriminate against people for being gay or in a a same sex couple and being sued over it that's different

but you can definitely express yourself
 
blarg said:
if your referring to people not being aloud to discriminate against people
Click to expand...

You discriminate every day. We just haven't made your brand of discrimination against the law. But we will.

What are you going to say when thinking people say "I don't make wedding cakes, I don't perform marriages, I don't cater wedding receptions"?

Force them?
 
Last edited:
it's just me said:
Unless you're a caterer, a baker, a photographer, a politician, a minister....

Shall I go on?



You discriminate every day. We just haven't made your brand of discrimination against the law. But we will.
Click to expand...

all those people can say what they like

yes we do discriminate apparently there are restrictions on that when it comes to business and I do support that

you can try to change it I guess no one is stopping you from expressing yourself
 
it's just me said:
Well, I know Pittsburgh is not representative of the rest of the US (especially since other cities have real football teams) but it's hardly a different country.
Click to expand...

Wow you are all over the place first you make up fantasy stories about people being sued for expressing thier beliefs and now you call a NFL org not real when its the one with more championships than any other one. Weird.

Anyway what country do you live in, I hope it takes pointers from us and you eventually have more freedom, its sad that your country doesnt.
 
it's just me said:
What are you going to say when thinking people say "I don't make wedding cakes, I don't perform marriages, I don't cater wedding receptions"?

Force them?
Click to expand...

uhm whats this have to do with anything? none of those things are against the law, you are severely confused about the topic at hand.

if true, those are all perfectly legal things to do
 
Paleocon said:
I did not refer to the existence of God. If you don't know what "ontological" means then that's your problem.
Click to expand...

Ontological is code word for "I do not want to sound like I am imposing God or my religion on others so I pull the ontological circular argument out to pretend like I am not in favor of imposing theocracy on Americans that seem to think mixing state and religion is a very very very bad thing.
 
WCH said:
What percentage of SSMz actually involve children (counting the ones whose lives are ruined bscause of it) ?
Click to expand...

What percent of heterosexual marriages actually involve children? (Counting the ones whose lives are ruined because of it)

You cannot possibly prove that any child's life is "ruined" because their parents were gay. Some gay parents are likely bad parents and ruined their children's lives, but it wasn't because they were gay. That is a fantasy of those against same sex marriage and same sex couples raising children, not reality.
 
WCH said:
Stigmatization.

The Leftist mind washings have also driven a wedge between children and normal parents.
Click to expand...

This is like saying that mixed children are stigmatized by their families for making them believe that interracial relationships are normal and that mixed children's stigmatization (which still does exist in some places) is due to their parents, not those who are simply being taught to hate others based on who their parents are, to stigmatize, tease, or ostracize others based on who their parents are.
 
Navy Pride said:
One for the good guys.............


South Carolina Supreme Court Halts Same-Sex Marriage Licenses


Posted: 10/09/2014 12:29 pm EDT Updated: 10/09/2014 12:59 pm EDT





COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — The South Carolina Supreme Court is ordering state probate courts not to issue same-sex marriage licenses until a federal judge decides whether the state constitution's ban on the unions is legal.

The Supreme Court's order disappointed dozens of gay couples in a whirlwind week of legal maneuvers.
Click to expand...

The Good Guys are the ones who don't impose their beliefs on others. Denying marriage to consenting non-related adult humans defines what a bad guy is.
 
it's just me said:
You discriminate every day. We just haven't made your brand of discrimination against the law. But we will.

What are you going to say when thinking people say "I don't make wedding cakes, I don't perform marriages, I don't cater wedding receptions"?

Force them?
Click to expand...

Okay? If they don't actually do those things, make wedding cakes, perform marriages, cater wedding receptions, then they are not going to run into any legal problems if they turn anyone down for refusing to do those things for them. They have never agreed to do those things for others in the public to begin with.
 
roguenuke said:
Okay? If they don't actually do those things, make wedding cakes, perform marriages, cater wedding receptions, then they are not going to run into any legal problems if they turn anyone down for refusing to do those things for them. They have never agreed to do those things for others in the public to begin with.
Click to expand...

I am not sure why this is such a difficult concept!
 
year2late said:
I am not sure why this is such a difficult concept!
Click to expand...

And the only time that "performing" wedding ceremonies may come into the picture as being in conflict with antidiscrimination laws is if there is a business where the person has declared that they will marry anyone then tells a couple because of some protected characteristic (they are mixed race, mixed faith, same sex, opposite sex, an old woman and young, but still adult man) that they will not marry them. (Thinking wedding chapels in Vegas may have an issue if they try to refuse to marry someone, but not totally sure, since it might depend on the circumstances and don't know what rules those chapels fall under.)
 
roguenuke said:
And the only time that "performing" wedding ceremonies may come into the picture as being in conflict with antidiscrimination laws is if there is a business where the person has declared that they will marry anyone then tells a couple because of some protected characteristic (they are mixed race, mixed faith, same sex, opposite sex, an old woman and young, but still adult man) that they will not marry them. (Thinking wedding chapels in Vegas may have an issue if they try to refuse to marry someone, but not totally sure, since it might depend on the circumstances and don't know what rules those chapels fall under.)
Click to expand...

Exactly. No one is forcing a Priest to perform a marriage ceremony for a gay couple.
 
WCH said:
How about their being a horrible example.for our young people?
Click to expand...
Circular. You think they are a horrible example because of some detriment to society. Since you can't identify any detriment, they are not a "horrible example" of anything.

How about we would eventually die out if everyone decide to be Gay?
Click to expand...
Do you really want me to address this? Really? This is a real argument you are making?
Homosexuals are a detriment because if theoretically everyone on the planet "decided to be gay," we would eventually die out. That's your ****ing argument. Really.

First off, no we wouldn't. Homosexuals can and do have children. The parts all still function, WCH. Second, there are other means of conception that science has given us. Third, people would still want to have children. Fourth, you don't "decide to be gay." It is not a conscious choice. Finally, this might be the dumbest argument I've ever heard. Do yo think that's a possibility? Can you really tell me that you honestly have concern that every person on the planet might "decide to be gay." Are you going to decide to be gay? Seriously, you brought this argument up. Are you telling me it's honest? Tell me. I want you to tell me that this is honestly an argument you are making in favor of homosexuality being a detriment. Do you have the courage to stand by your statements?

How about God detroying us for allowing it to be normalised?
Click to expand...
When that happens, you'll have some evidence that homosexuals are a detriment to society. Assuming you can link homosexuality to that wrath and not, say, the divorce rate of heterosexuals or the murder rate in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. But we're talking about mortal laws and actions and courts here. "God might destroy us" is not going to hold up in court, surely you agree.
 
it's just me said:
You discriminate every day. We just haven't made your brand of discrimination against the law. But we will.

What are you going to say when thinking people say "I don't make wedding cakes, I don't perform marriages, I don't cater wedding receptions"?

Force them?
Click to expand...

Wait, are you suggesting someone will try to force a real estate salesman to make a wedding cake? And you think anti-discrimination laws would require them to make a wedding cake?
 
WCH said:
How about their being a horrible example.for our young people? How about we would eventually die out if everyone decide to be Gay? How about God detroying us for allowing it to be normalised?
Click to expand...

"Horrible example for our young people" would be a subjective assessment and therefore meaningless. And you cannot turn someone gay by mentoring them or setting an example for them.

No, we would not all die out. As others have pointed out, and I have done on other threads, this is the stupidest argument ever in relation to this subject. Gay people can still have children. Men and women will still want to have children, even if they don't necessarily want to be in intimate relationships with each other. You can have sex with someone just for the purpose of procreation without any intimate relationship with that person. Plus, there are these methods we have now that can make babies without sex. Miracles of science. And most importantly, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that everyone would "decide" to become gay. If anything, we might all become bisexual, which would not affect us having children at all.

I'd be more concerned about God destroying us for allowing rape, murders, crime, hurting our fellow man, judging our fellow man in His place, and so many other things that are supposedly (according to the Bible and the Ten Commandments) more important to God. God has had tens of thousands of years to take us out for homosexuality, and yet refuses. We have members of certain religions killing members of other religions all over the world. There are women being killed just for wanting equal rights, an education, to not be beat or considered slaves/property, yet you believe that God is so petty that He would be more concerned with the gays?
 
roguenuke said:
There are women being killed just for wanting equal rights, an education, to not be beat or considered slaves/property, yet you believe that God is so petty that He would be more concerned with the gays?
Click to expand...

"Your God is too small!"

Probably Not Actually Said By Giordano Bruno during his heresy trial
 
it's just me said:
You discriminate every day. We just haven't made your brand of discrimination against the law. But we will.

What are you going to say when thinking people say "I don't make wedding cakes, I don't perform marriages, I don't cater wedding receptions"?

Force them?
Click to expand...


I don't think you understand how Public Accommodation laws work. Let me assist you.

When a business voluntarily opens they determine the goods and services that they will offer to the general public. A business is not required under Public Accommodation laws to add goods and services that they do no routinely offer. Using your example, if a bakery doesn't make wedding cakes or a caterer doesn't cater wedding receptions, then they are not required by the law to bake wedding cakes or cater wedding receptions for anyone.

Notice I skipped "I don't perform marriages" - that depends on the "who" is. There are 3 types of individuals capable of officiating a wedding ceremony (religious and civil).

1. Clergy: If it is a member of the clergy officiating a wedding, then they are not required to perform a religious ceremony that conflicts with their religious dogma.

2. Government officials in the performance of official duties: These would typically fall into the Records Registrar and County Clerk jobs where their job description requires that they issue Civil Marriage licenses and in some places perform a Civil Service on the spot. Since it is their job, and as employees of the government, they can be required to perform their assigned duties.

3. Government officials NOT in the performance of official duties: These include Judges, Mayors, (in some places) Notaries, etc. able perform Civil Marriage ceremonies on a voluntary basis, they are not required to do it as any part of their official job description but are empowered to do it if they choose. I seem to remember a Judge some time ago that refused to perform ANY marriage ceremonies because of discrimination against same-sex couples. If the individual decides to not perform any (different-sex or same-sex) ceremonies, they are free to do that.​



>>>>
 
WCH said:
What percentage of SSMz actually involve children (counting the ones whose lives are ruined bscause of it) ?
Click to expand...

Gay people want families as much as straight people. Reproduction is the strongest instinct on Earth.

Even when in straight relationships (many gays married in attempts to seem 'normal,' or to fulfill social expectations), gay people have kids. That's been history for centuries if not longer.

So plenty have kids...from previous straight relationships, from adoption, IVF, surrogates, etc.
 
WCH said:
Stigmatization.

The Leftist mind washings have also driven a wedge between children and normal parents.
Click to expand...

Once people like you die out....aging away...those generations with such prejudices will be gone and that stigma will disappear.

As it is disappearing for interracial marriage... but sadly, not gone.
 
WorldWatcher said:
I don't think you understand how Public Accommodation laws work. Let me assist you.

When a business voluntarily opens they determine the goods and services that they will offer to the general public. A business is not required under Public Accommodation laws to add goods and services that they do no routinely offer. Using your example, if a bakery doesn't make wedding cakes or a caterer doesn't cater wedding receptions, then they are not required by the law to bake wedding cakes or cater wedding receptions for anyone.

Notice I skipped "I don't perform marriages" - that depends on the "who" is. There are 3 types of individuals capable of officiating a wedding ceremony (religious and civil).

1. Clergy: If it is a member of the clergy officiating a wedding, then they are not required to perform a religious ceremony that conflicts with their religious dogma.

2. Government officials in the performance of official duties: These would typically fall into the Records Registrar and County Clerk jobs where their job description requires that they issue Civil Marriage licenses and in some places perform a Civil Service on the spot. Since it is their job, and as employees of the government, they can be required to perform their assigned duties.

3. Government officials NOT in the performance of official duties: These include Judges, Mayors, (in some places) Notaries, etc. able perform Civil Marriage ceremonies on a voluntary basis, they are not required to do it as any part of their official job description but are empowered to do it if they choose. I seem to remember a Judge some time ago that refused to perform ANY marriage ceremonies because of discrimination against same-sex couples. If the individual decides to not perform any (different-sex or same-sex) ceremonies, they are free to do that.​



>>>>
Click to expand...

There was a Justice of the Peace somewhere in the South that refused to preside over interracial marriages.

Judge Defends Denied Interracial Marriage - CBS News

He did resign over it before we could find out if the state would have done anything about his refusal. He was sued by the couple but they dropped the charges within the year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom