• 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

No, it wasnt a question...it refuted your attempt at an answer.

As you still cannot refute it, my argument remains as truth.

There was nothing for me to refute. Only your assertions.
 
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?

Two people in love getting married is a horrible example for young people? In your twisted universe...

Everyone "decide to be Gay?" Uh...people don't decide to be gay, your "god" creates them that way, and evidently your "god" is some kind of sadistic jerk for wanting to "detroy" us for doing something that he created.
 
:lamo

Do tell us about Jesus' rants against homosexuality.

Jesus hung out with a bunch of guys...just saying...and he was a bachelor....
 
Now what are you babbling about?

Here, let me post it for you for clarity, altho I dont know why you've forgotten it so quicky.


Because it is not possible ontologically to terminate such a marriage.

OMG, how irrelevant!

Ontological argument:

: an argument for the existence of God based upon the meaning of the term God

Palecon continues to attempt to get Americal to create (or maintain) law based on a belief in God.
:)

Where was I babbling again?
 
There was nothing for me to refute. Only your assertions.

You could not refute my assertions. I like that. It shows that they are valid.
 
Here, let me post it for you for clarity, altho I dont know why you've forgotten it so quicky.






Where was I babbling again?

I was talking about the nature of divorce, then you started going on about arguments for the existence of God.
 
I was talking about the nature of divorce, then you started going on about arguments for the existence of God.

You are mistaken again. You opened that door in the discussion on divorce:

Because it is not possible ontologically to terminate such a marriage.

Care to deny anything else?
 
You are mistaken again. You opened that door in the discussion on divorce:



Care to deny anything else?

I did not refer to the existence of God. If you don't know what "ontological" means then that's your problem.
 
I did not refer to the existence of God. If you don't know what "ontological" means then that's your problem.

This was a direct quote:
Ontological argument:

: an argument for the existence of God based upon the meaning of the term God

Here's the link: Ontological argument - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


We can go with this one too, which also is explicitly about hierarchies of existence:

Ontology is the philosophical study of the nature of being, becoming, existence, or reality, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations. Traditionally listed as a part of the major branch of philosophy known as metaphysics, ontology deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.

Ontology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


It all comes back to a higher authority running the show. Your denial is clear dishonesty. What does your 'higher authority' think about lying?
 
South Carolina and Lindsay Graham should secede right into the Atlantic Ocean--especially with the rising seaboard.
We'll also take back our Military installations--as Scotland was threatened with-
The USA--Love it or Leave it--remember how you righties used to use that in the 1980's .
 
Heteros are by nature non-fornicating but, I do indeed dislike adulterers.

Hetero's are not by nature fornicators? Prove it. With links to statistics.
 
Simply by their unnatural existence. They are like a blight on the citrus crop....a stye on your eye....the nasty last sip of a cheap beer.

Since homosexuality is not unnatural, your post is irrelevant.
 
It is reality, that I happen to acknowledge.

No, since faith and belief are relative to the individual and not universal, it is only YOUR reality. Needing to apply it universally just shows the weakness in your own faith.
 
How about their being a horrible example.for our young people?

Actually, homosexuals can be an excellent example to young people. They have successful careers, live good lives, and do all the things that many heterosexuals do. And since we know that there is nothing wrong with being homosexual, there is nothing wrong with a young person admiring them.

How about we would eventually die out if everyone decide to be Gay?

This is know as the appeal to the absurd logical fallacy. Since this will not happen, your point is irrelevant.

How about God detroying us for allowing it to be normalised?

Since homosexuality is normal and God has never said anything against consensual homosexual activity, there is no fear from Him at all.
 
Why those sneaky bastards.

The refused to hear cases on appeal from the 10th, 7th, and 4th Circuit courts where in each of the 7 cases (7 cases, from 5 states, heard by the 3 Circuits) where in each case the of Appeals decision was that the State bans were unconstitutional so that the SCOTUS's own stay was lifted (and thereby the stays from the Circuits) which allows same-sex Civil Marriage to start in those 5 States and as many as 11 States once the Cicruit courts apply their ruling to the other 6 states.

Thousands, probably 10's of thousands of legal same-sex Civil Marriages will occur - marriages that won't be revoked because they were legal at the time. (It would take an ex post facto law to invalidate them, which is itself unconstitutional.)


Just so in the future they can take some other case and rule that from that point forward that States can enact laws that discriminate against homosexuals.


Diabolical I say...

............... Diabolical.



>>>>

its a shame this doesnt have more likes ;)
 
While I don't believe that homosexuality is right for me, it is none of my business how others live their lives. Who am I to judge someone who is different? And I am glad I have that attitude. My wife's psychiatrist is gay, and I wouldn't take her to any other doctor. He is worth every penny that we pay for his help. I can imagine the bigots who need help in one form or another cutting themselves off to a substantial portion of that help because they are bigots. That not only makes them bigots, but morons as well, as I am sure that they would be willing to even knowingly throw their own lives away by refusing help from someone they hate so much. I wonder how many of them have had a blood transfusion after being in an accident? I bet some of that blood came from gay people, black people, Hispanics, Asians, and Jews. If they found out, I wonder if they would commit suicide. LOL. But, seriously, I wouldn't wish suicide on them. I am an American, after all. :)

America ROCKS, but bigots are STONED on hatred. Feel the burn, bigots. Your hate is dying.
 
Last edited:
The war against equal rights is all but over, little battles may break out here and there and heck there could even be a short lived shallow victory for those against equal rights but the winner of the war is CLEAR. Equal rights is coming and its been kicking ass the last couple years. Its the fourth quarter and the bigots and or oppressors are desperate and throwing up hail marys and doing flea flickers but nothing is going to work. The defense of equal rights is shutting it down lol

Its a lost failed, uneducated and misguided cause.

I doubt the game even plays into 2016.

If equal rights bothers you, grab a box of tissues because you are losing and your complete loss is on the horizon.
 
He is indeed that loving and forgiving and takes the entire breadth of our lives into consideration, not one thing. A gay family, raising their kids in a healthy, happy environment? God would NEVER judge them harshly. If you believe that, you are living in the Old Testament in order to gratify yourself and your own judgements...which is against God's Law.

What percentage of SSMz actually involve children (counting the ones whose lives are ruined bscause of it) ?
 
What percentage of SSMz actually involve children (counting the ones whose lives are ruined bscause of it) ?

whys it matter how many have kids?

and how dose it ruin children's lives?
 
whys it matter how many have kids?

and how dose it ruin children's lives?

Stigmatization.

The Leftist mind washings have also driven a wedge between children and normal parents.
 
Stigmatization.

The Leftist mind washings have also driven a wedge between children and normal parents.
The left is much more unlikely to stigmatize kids of gay children than those who feel gay marriage is wrong.

You are blaming the left for choices members of other groups make.
 
Stigmatization.

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

you seem to be nurturing that kind of stigma

and in that case its not gay marriage that shuts kids its people being abusive to others because their opposed to gay marriage

what kind of wedge has been driven between parents and kids?
 
and homosexuality is hurting people how gay marriage is hurting people how?

It hurts him having to put up with the groupthink from your side of the room. It hurts him to express his beliefs only to be sued over it. It hurts the rest of us to have the thought police on the left constantly trying to shove their beliefs down everyone else's throats. Sound familiar?
 
Last edited:
It hurts him having to put up with the groupthink from your side of the room. It hurts him to express his beliefs only to be sued over it. Why do the thought police on the left think they are the only ones who can have a belief or an opinion?

Wow your country sounds terrible, im glad thats not happening here in the US, you should try to move here if you can!
 
It hurts him having to put up with the groupthink from your side of the room. It hurts him to express his beliefs only to be sued over it. It hurts the rest of us to have the thought police on the left constantly trying to shove their beliefs down everyone else's throats. Sound familiar?

so not gay marriage

not actually happening


not actually happening

sounds very familiar
 
Back
Top Bottom