• 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: US S.Ct. Rules Same Sex Marriage Constitutionally Protected[W:320]

What part of your marriage has been redefined? What about your life is changing?



Churches aren't now forced to perform heterosexual marriages, so I'm not sure why you think they'd be forced to perform same-sex marriages. No good can come of this? How about more children being in a two-parent, married household?

A church that doesn't believe in same-sex marriage will be forced to perform the ceremony OR risk being sued. I don't know of any churches that are against real marriage.

I'm all for a traditional "Two-parent household" of course. Two mommies or two daddys is just creepy and does have some negative effect on the child. Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children
 
5 robed buffoons unilaterally lording over 350 million is your idea of democracy?

That's the way it works. It protects us from be overlorded by redneck, freedom hating, intolerant people like, well, yourself.

You lose. Get over it. Get used to it.
 
I do love her, but marriage as an institution is pointless. The only reason I would do it anymore is for tax breaks.

Great. So why get so upset if other people chose to do it?
 
Look at all the ****s I give.

You give so many ****s you responded to a post that wasn't even addressed to you. You can be a flaming faggot all you want, you'll never be accepted. You'll always be an outcast, no matter what the court says. I hate you.
 
I do love her, but marriage as an institution is pointless. The only reason I would do it anymore is for tax breaks.

HA.

Dollars to donuts you'll still end up getting married assuming one would agree to do so. This little temper tantrum won't stop that.
 
The fact that you can marry means I will not be asking my girlfriend to marry me...I don't want to share the same institution as you.

You may have won a court case, and the left-leaning folks on this site may support you, but you will NEVER be socially accepted by mainstream America.

I never had a problem with gays before today, but this is too much. I will not be your friend.

Yeah...in a few posts you admitted you find gays disgusting and their presence in marriage enough to soil it. You clearly have had a problem with Gay folk. I wish you nothing but love and peace and I think I will use your post as my signature. It exemplifies something I do not want people to ever forget.
 
And if this happens (eventhough same sex marriage has been legal in some parts of this country for over a decade now and that hasn't happened), there will be plenty of support for those churches. This is your paranoia showing through.

It's not paranoia. It's reality. Look at the facts and look at what's going on in the country. It's real.
 
A church that doesn't believe in same-sex marriage will be forced to perform the ceremony OR risk being sued. I don't know of any churches that are against real marriage.
First of all, public accommodation laws are a different topic. Second of all, private churches aren't subject to those laws. Churches do not have to perform any ceremony they don't want to.


I'm all for a traditional "Two-parent household" of course. Two mommies or two daddys is just creepy and does have some negative effect on the child. Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children

Plenty of actual research has been done and found no negative effects on the child. Marriage improves conditions for children.
 
HA.

Dollars to donuts you'll still end up getting married assuming one would agree to do so. This little temper tantrum won't stop that.

Nah I was already leaning that way anyway...the Supreme Court decision isn't exactly a surprise. The courts will always side with the left
 
Because you stole marriage from me and made it something dirty

No we didn't. You can still get married. Your relationship still holds the same meaning to you, I hope.
 
5 robed buffoons unilaterally lording over 350 million is your idea of democracy?

The Majority...nay a SIGNIFICANT MAJORITY...supports same sex marriage. So, guess what? Your 350 million is more like 125 million.
 
Yeah...in a few posts you admitted you find gays disgusting and their presence in marriage enough to soil it. You clearly have had a problem with Gay folk. I wish you nothing but love and peace and I think I will use your post as my signature. It exemplifies something I do not want people to ever forget.

You do NOT have my permission to use my post as a signature, and to do so would violate forum rules.
 
Ok. So if I open a flower shop and refuse to participate in a gay wedding, I won't be prosecuted? I'm glad that is settled law then.

Depends on state laws. If you open a flower shop and refuse to participate in an interracial wedding or interfaith wedding or Jewish wedding or atheist wedding, are you going to be prosecuted for doing so? Why is it okay for you to face punishment for refusing to participate in those other weddings but not for a same sex wedding?
 
A church that doesn't believe in same-sex marriage will be forced to perform the ceremony OR risk being sued. I don't know of any churches that are against real marriage.

Again, I already told you this, but I will say it again. The majority opinion in this case EXPLICITLY carves out an exception for religious institutions under First Amendment grounds.
 
no pretending required. marriage is a fundamental right that cannot be denied due to sexual orientation.

Please cite the exact passage in the Constitution where marriage is listed as a right. If you can't (and you can't) you're wrong.

Dred Scott was just a terrible decision. the fourteenth amendment came after that.

Setting aside the fact that I obviously don't like slavery and do think freedom of contract is important such that I don't really care if seventeen folks want to get "married," regardless of who's having sex with whom...

On the level of what it does regarding the Constitution, this is no different from and no better than Dred Scott.
 
You do NOT have my permission to use my post as a signature, and to do so would violate forum rules.

I'm fairly certain calling someone a "flaming faggot" is also a violation of forum rules.
 
I was just on a flight with a gay flight attendant. Everyone was nice to his face but they were laughing at him behind his back.

You'd be surprised by how many people are laughing at YOU now. That is what happens when you are on the wrong side of history.
 
What I meant was the right will come to the polls in droves, Hillary will be routed

Who cares? I think it depends on who the candidate is. And this issue will have no bearing on it because no candidate that was against same sex marriage that much stands a chance of beating Hillary, no matter how big the right's hate is for her. The rest of us will make sure that people like Rick Perry or Santorum don't make it into the White House.
 
Back
Top Bottom