• 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!

Dr. Ben Carson Apologizes For Saying Being Gay Is a Choice

chromium said:
Sounds like typical political jargon to me - being as loudmouthed as possible while saying nothing of value

Why the hell is he even commenting on this? The supreme court will decide SSM in june, *18 months* before the next prez will even take office.
Click to expand...

Why would a Supreme Court ruling mean anything. We still debate abortion and that was decided over 40 years ago. What fail to understand that with certain segments of the conservative movement the Supreme Court ruling means nothing. Their interpretation of the Constitution is the only thing that matters.
 
Hatuey said:
He's not stupid. Are you a doctor of some sort? Scratch that, are you a well respected doctor? No? I'm not either. However, I won't pretend that his success in his field isn't there. The problem with Ben Carson is that he's been played off as too educated to not realize what he was saying. His supporters have two choices, they can either say it was a gaffe and should be forgiven - they won't because that would show he's not as brilliant as they pretend he is. Or they can stand behind his words which basically sets them back 10 years.
Click to expand...
Good points. Far too often, people equate brilliance in one field with overall intellect and it just simply isn't so.. Quite the contrary, because it takes so much effort and time to to excel in one field, that takes away from the opportunity to broaden ones knowledge in other fields.
In this particular instance, such a statement from a physician, no less, betrays a much more serious flaw, one of character, for which no amount of knowledge can compensate.
 
Hatuey said:
He's not stupid. Are you a doctor of some sort? Scratch that, are you a well respected doctor? No? I'm not either. However, I won't pretend that his success in his field isn't there. The problem with Ben Carson is that he's been played off as too educated to not realize what he was saying. His supporters have two choices, they can either say it was a gaffe and should be forgiven - they won't because that would show he's not as brilliant as they pretend he is. Or they can stand behind his words which basically sets them back 10 years.
Click to expand...

success doesn't mean intelligent and certainly not wise.

He's like an idiot savant. He has one area he seems to know well while being an idiot and a fool in every other way.
 
smb said:
Why would a Supreme Court ruling mean anything. We still debate abortion and that was decided over 40 years ago. What fail to understand that with certain segments of the conservative movement the Supreme Court ruling means nothing. Their interpretation of the Constitution is the only thing that matters.
Click to expand...

Abortion is fundamentally diff because of feuding over the cutoff and other restrictions, as well as new technologies that call into question the parameters of a court decision 40 years ago. I fail to see such ambiguities in SSM rulings. From the start it's been an either/or.

Also, support for SSM has skyrocketed, while support for abortion rights has been flat. If you ask Ginsburg, the court acted before the public was ready. If you ask me, the public wouldn't reach a consensus on abortion until 2100 regardless. It's just a completely different issue

But yes i'm sure the crazies will continue to cry about gay rights 40 years from now, but i don't see why every republican candidate will feel compelled to placate them, any more than ben carson is demanding to overturn Brown v Board
 
tres borrachos said:
No, I asked you to show me something that proves that 90-95% of the people who cast a vote for POTUS are doing so based on that candidate's opinion on abortion, religion and marriage.
Click to expand...

So you want me to not only provide you with links to research but read the research to you also...demand much?
 
sangha said:
success doesn't mean intelligent
Click to expand...

Success in a field that requires various types of intelligence certainly does. This isn't like a DP member pretending to be a doctor but displaying biblical levels of stupidity. This is a person who is a demonstrably well respected member of his professional community because the nature of his work requires both versatility and knowledge. Sorry, his comment may be stupid, but Ben Carson certainly isn't.
 
People, all people, sometimes stick their foot in their mouth or screw up saying what they are trying to say. The guy apologized. As far as I'm concerned, this non-issue is officially a non-issue.

 
chromium said:
Abortion is fundamentally diff because of feuding over the cutoff and other restrictions, as well as new technologies that call into question the parameters of a court decision 40 years ago. I fail to see such ambiguities in SSM rulings. From the start it's been an either/or.

Also, support for SSM has skyrocketed, while support for abortion rights has been flat. If you ask Ginsburg, the court acted before the public was ready. If you ask me, the public wouldn't reach a consensus on abortion until 2100 regardless. It's just a completely different issue

But yes i'm sure the crazies will continue to cry about gay rights 40 years from now, but i don't see why every republican candidate will feel compelled to placate them, any more than ben carson is demanding to overturn Brown v Board
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter which issue you bring up. It could be the VRA, Imminent Domain, ACA, Miranda, Gideon I could go on and on and on. The issue is not the individual issue or the individual ruling. The issue is that there is a significant percentage of people out their, mostly on the right but a some on the left, that feel their interpretation of the Constitution trumps all. That if the Supreme Court rules something that they disagree with it just means that the SCOTUS is wrong. It does not mean the issue is settled.
 
smb said:
So you want me to not only provide you with links to research but read the research to you also...demand much?
Click to expand...

You're the one who made the claim, not me. When you say something like that, you have to back it up.

In 2008 candidate Barack Obama said "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage." I would like you to post something that would back up your claim that 90-95% of the POTUS voters cast their votes based on the candidate's stance on marriage, abortion, or religion. Please show me something that shows that the votes of 90-95% of the voters were impacted by that statement, and how so.
 
tres borrachos said:
You're the one who made the claim, not me. When you say something like that, you have to back it up.

In 2008 candidate Barack Obama said "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage." I would like you to post something that would back up your claim that 90-95% of the POTUS voters cast their votes based on the candidate's stance on marriage, abortion, or religion. Please show me something that shows that the votes of 90-95% of the voters were impacted by that statement, and how so.
Click to expand...

I provided you a link to one of the many sources that use to develop my opinions. I am not going to spoon feed you. Good god you are either really lazy or very demanding or both. How about pick up a book about wedge politics and read it. I gave you link to a very good one. It clarifies why I hold the opinion I do. If you don't think it meets your demands of showing evidence then that is your problem not mine. Why do you feel it necessary that everyone that counters your opinion must spoonfeed you the information. I tell you what if you really want me to I will read the book into my Ipod and post it on itunes as a free podcast. Will that satisfy your ridiculous demand????? Thought not...please do your own research and reading. I can provide you all the source material you want but I won't spoon feed it to you.
 
smb said:
I provided you a link to one of the many sources that use to develop my opinions. I am not going to spoon feed you. Good god you are either really lazy or very demanding or both. How about pick up a book about wedge politics and read it. I gave you link to a very good one. It clarifies why I hold the opinion I do. If you don't think it meets your demands of showing evidence then that is your problem not mine. Why do you feel it necessary that everyone that counters your opinion must spoonfeed you the information. I tell you what if you really want me to I will read the book into my Ipod and post it on itunes as a free podcast. Will that satisfy your ridiculous demand????? Thought not...please do your own research and reading. I can provide you all the source material you want but I won't spoon feed it to you.
Click to expand...

Ah, so it was your opinion that 90-95% of the voters vote for the POTUS candidate based on the candidate's opinion on abortion, marriage and religion, and you have nothing to back that up, and you can't even answer how 90-95% of the voters who voted in 2008 chose to vote for or not vote for Obama based on his anti-SSM stance. And you're mad that there's this little thing that people do on here, which is expecting people who make claims will back them up. Got it.

I think you stumbled into the wrong board. See, if I posted something like "95% of the Romney voters cast a vote in 2008 for the candidate they chose because Obama opposed same sex marriage", not only would I be asked to explain that - I'd be laughed right off the board.
 
smb said:
It doesn't matter which issue you bring up. It could be the VRA, Imminent Domain, ACA, Miranda, Gideon I could go on and on and on. The issue is not the individual issue or the individual ruling. The issue is that there is a significant percentage of people out their, mostly on the right but a some on the left, that feel their interpretation of the Constitution trumps all. That if the Supreme Court rules something that they disagree with it just means that the SCOTUS is wrong. It does not mean the issue is settled.
Click to expand...

So what if they do? They are powerless without a critical mass of support, and a SCOTUS ruling on top of that makes the opposition completely impotent. Look at segregationists today to see what will become of the ben carsons 40 years from now
 
I'll ignore all the insults and gratuitous comments directed at a man who's had a distinguished career in medicine and decided late in life that offering his services to his country would be a good way to give back for the gifts and benefits his life in America has given him.

Secondly, I personally wish people would stop apologizing for stating how they feel. Either have the intestinal fortitude to stick by your opinions or don't bother expressing them. Likewise, not all people will like you or support you no matter what you do or say so stop trying to pander to those who only want to destroy you. Suck it up and simply state, "that's my opinion, I'm entitled to it, and if you don't like or support it, you're entitled not to".

Finally, I wish Dr. Carson had decided to seek a lower office as his first foray into politics. As a doctor, I'm sure he didn't jump right into operating on conjoined twins as his first endeavour. Likewise, opting to jump into a Presidential race as your first shot is the height of hubris and a sign of poor judgement, also not a good fit for the Presidency.
 
Gina said:
He supports LGBT rights, and the right of states to deny them? Seems a bit contradictory.

To the rest, wow! He had a big first day as a prospective presidential candidate.
Click to expand...

You have confused personal beliefs with support of states rights. As an example, I oppose government involvement in health care but I support the right of Mass. to enact Romneycare. If the majority of a state want to inflict that on themselves, states rights gives them a choice.
 
You need vast amounts of political intelligence to be president. If he can't even catch a softball like "is being gay a choice" he's barking up the wrong tree. Even Phil from Duck Duck Goose or whatever that show was had enough sense to babble on and imply things rather than just come right out and straight up say social conservative crap that cannot be massaged and defended.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Top prize for most bigoted post of the day. But you've still got time to top it.
Click to expand...

Not bigoted if it's true. Hey, anyone else remembered when the crowd at the repub primary debate *booed a gay soldier*??
 
tres borrachos said:
Ah, so it was your opinion that 90-95% of the voters vote for the POTUS candidate based on the candidate's opinion on abortion, marriage and religion, and you have nothing to back that up, and you can't even answer how 90-95% of the voters who voted in 2008 chose to vote for or not vote for Obama based on his anti-SSM stance. And you're mad that there's this little thing that people do on here, which is expecting people who make claims will back them up. Got it.

I think you stumbled into the wrong board. See, if I posted something like "95% of the Romney voters cast a vote in 2008 for the candidate they chose because Obama opposed same sex marriage", not only would I be asked to explain that - I'd be laughed right off the board.
Click to expand...

I think you are a demanding, lazy person that is unwilling to accept anything as "proof" unless you can read it in 5 minutes or less.

As far as stumbling on the wrong board...I have been on this board a long time. Longer than you as it turns out. I am continually amazed that people are shocked, shocked to find out people express their OPINIONS on a political discussion board. Most political positions are OPINIONS that are rooted in fact. I have the OPINION that wedge politics drives American voters. I have provided you with one factual anthology that backs up my OPINION with FACT. You are unwilling or unable to take the time and energy to review that book and judge the facts for yourself. That is your problem not mine. I have given you the resources. It is up to you if you want to use them or not.

As far as being laughed off the board...I would think anyone who requires people to do their research for them instead of doing it themselves would be laughed off the board. My opinion is steadfast...the vast majority of the American electorate are defined by wedge politics. I have provided you one of the sources I used to arrive at that opinion. It is not chart, graph or short blurb by some monosyllabic hack. It is researched, documented factual account of what drives American voters. Read it...don't read it. I do not care. But do not say that I have not backed up my opinion because I have. You wold be a liar if you continue to say that. Just because you do not like how I back up my opinions that is not for you to decide.
 
smb said:
I think you are a demanding, lazy person that is unwilling to accept anything as "proof" unless you can read it in 5 minutes or less.

As far as stumbling on the wrong board...I have been on this board a long time. Longer than you as it turns out. I am continually amazed that people are shocked, shocked to find out people express their OPINIONS on a political discussion board. Most political positions are OPINIONS that are rooted in fact. I have the OPINION that wedge politics drives American voters. I have provided you with one factual anthology that backs up my OPINION with FACT. You are unwilling or unable to take the time and energy to review that book and judge the facts for yourself. That is your problem not mine. I have given you the resources. It is up to you if you want to use them or not.

As far as being laughed off the board...I would think anyone who requires people to do their research for them instead of doing it themselves would be laughed off the board. My opinion is steadfast...the vast majority of the American electorate are defined by wedge politics. I have provided you one of the sources I used to arrive at that opinion. It is not chart, graph or short blurb by some monosyllabic hack. It is researched, documented factual account of what drives American voters. Read it...don't read it. I do not care. But do not say that I have not backed up my opinion because I have. You wold lying if you continue to say that. Just because you do not like how I back up my opinions that is not for you to decide.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you have posted nothing that backs up your claim that 90-95% of the people who cast a vote for POTUS do so based on the candidate's opinion on abortion, marriage, or religion.

I won't report your post that calls me names, which you aren't supposed to do. I didn't call you any names. I asked you to back up your claim, which you didn't. I told you that on this board when we make claims, we back them up when asked. And I also posted an example that included Obama's stance on same sex marriage which proves that your claim that 90-95% of the people who voted for (Obama or Romney) did so because of Obama's (or Romney's) position on same sex marriage, because Obama's stated opinion is the opposite of what you would assume his supporters believe.

Have a fun day.
 
Crosscheck said:
True, it will not change one vote for or against him. It just shows how this guy is not ready for prime time. But he promises to bring some comedy to the doldrums of this election
Click to expand...

There is something quietly weird regarding Dr. Ben Carson. He's personable; hospitable and looks trustworthy UNTIL HE OPENS HIS MOUTH! Ugh! The man is a throwback to the fifties. I agree totally, he's simply not ready for prime time and there's not enough time left in his life for such.
 
chromium said:
Not bigoted if it's true. Hey, anyone else remembered when the crowd at the repub primary debate *booed a gay soldier*??
Click to expand...

Do you remember what the question was about?

DADT - a Democrat President's answer to gays in the military. And since it was at that point in time declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and repealed by congress, why was it an issue in a Republican Party debate? And why is a person's sexual preference an issue in military service?

It is unfortunate that a lot of the audience booed the questioner. I believe many were booing the question, however. And you'd be hard pressed to make the argument that Republican voters don't respect the service of men and women of any race or sexual preference in America's armed services.

But the bigoted part, in case you didn't catch on, is you taking that incident and claiming that "mostly only bigots" vote in Republican primaries.
 
chromium said:
So what if they do? They are powerless without a critical mass of support, and a SCOTUS ruling on top of that makes the opposition completely impotent. Look at segregationists today to see what will become of the ben carsons 40 years from now
Click to expand...

I didn't say they had the power to do anything about rulings they disagree with. Your contention was that the SCOTUS ruling would somehow settle the argument. It has not settled the argument for the VRA, for abortion rights, for campaign finance, for search and seizure, for imminent domain, for guns control...I could go on and on. All of these issues are still Presidential campaign issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom