• 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!

Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

No one is dictating how you can live. How would gay marriage affect your lifestyle?

The reality is, gay marriage was legal in California for over 1/2 a year and it didn't affect the lives of those opposed to it in the slightest. Heterosexual marriage did not fail and society did not fall apart (as many right-wing opponents suggested).
Personally speaking, it doesn't affect my lifestyle. But I can see what bothers others about it. Keeping it private is essential. I certainly WOULD insist on keeping it indoors. Gay Pride parades and public "in your face" display of your lifestyle is self defeating, and some gays don't realize that.
 
I'll patiently await your response.
I thanked you for your admission that you cannot support your claim.
What further response is necessary?
 
Personally speaking, it doesn't affect my lifestyle. But I can see what bothers others about it. Keeping it private is essential. I certainly WOULD insist on keeping it indoors. Gay Pride parades and public "in your face" display of your lifestyle is self defeating, and some gays don't realize that.

Why should gays have to live their lives in the closet?

The solution is simple...if you don't want to go to a gay pride parade....don't.
 
Why should gays have to live their lives in the closet?

The solution is simple...if you don't want to go to a gay pride parade....don't.

I said indoors, not in the closet...a house is a big thing, usually, plenty of room to dance around naked, you don't need to do it outside in a public place, gay or straight.
 
I said indoors, not in the closet...a house is a big thing, usually, plenty of room to dance around naked, you don't need to do it outside in a public place, gay or straight.

There is a lot more to gay pride parades than people dancing around almost naked. That is simply the sensationalist part that the TV news love to you.


No one is saying that people should have sex in public or even PDA's (gay or straight). However, I don't subscribe to the idea that gays are ok as long as they act straight in public.
 
Did you take dancing lessons from our old friend Stinger?
Its quite simple really:
-You made a claim.
-I asked you to supprt it.
-You have not done so.

Now, you HAVE asked me to disprove your claim by providing a counter-example, but since its YOUR claim under discussion, and YOUR responsibility to support it, I am under NO obligation whatsoever to disprove it.

So, after failing on three seperate occasions to support your claim, you have effectively admitted that you cannoit support said claim; I have thanked you for that admission.

Nothng more need be said.

:2wave:
 
I think it's interesting that the same arguments used against homosexual marriage are the same arguments used against interracial marriage decades ago (against G-d, nature, decency, etc).

So I was a little disappointed to hear that Prop 8 was so popular with black voters the same year America elected its first black President. :(
 
Its quite simple really:
-You made a claim.
-I asked you to supprt it.
-You have not done so.

Now, you HAVE asked me to disprove your claim by providing a counter-example, but since its YOUR claim under discussion, and YOUR responsibility to support it, I am under NO obligation whatsoever to disprove it.

So, after failing on three seperate occasions to support your claim, you have effectively admitted that you cannoit support said claim; I have thanked you for that admission.

Nothng more need be said.

:2wave:

Dancing the Stinger Shuffle......
 
So I was a little disappointed to hear that Prop 8 was so popular with black voters the same year America elected its first black President. :(
Clearly, blacks are interested in a theocracy, where their religious views, fears and hatreds are imposed on others.
 
There is a lot more to gay pride parades than people dancing around almost naked. That is simply the sensationalist part that the TV news love to you.


No one is saying that people should have sex in public or even PDA's (gay or straight). However, I don't subscribe to the idea that gays are ok as long as they act straight in public.

Did I say that?
No, but if you must flame, do it inside. It is called public decency, or PDA as you say. Gays and straights should be arrested once the private parts become publicly displayed.
 
Clearly, blacks are interested in a theocracy, where their religious views, fears and hatreds are imposed on others.

It would seem that some are. How quickly history is forgotten...
 
I think it's interesting that the same arguments used against homosexual marriage are the same arguments used against interracial marriage decades ago (against G-d, nature, decency, etc).

So I was a little disappointed to hear that Prop 8 was so popular with black voters the same year America elected its first black President. :(

I bring this up all the time, I know from experience I grew up in a interracial household. I would hear this king of nonsense from the same people who have now turned their hate towards gays because our country finally has got to the point where racism is unacceptable in most circles.
 
All the evidence I've seen points to born-homosexuality being the result of a person's brain interpreting the pheromones of the same gender as though it were the opposite gender.

This seems obviously incongruent the purpose and function of that individual’s gender, and therefore stands out as some sort of malfunction not far removed from Gender Identity Disorder or a lesser manifestation of Transexuality.

IMO we should put our resources into developing legitimate treatment for this physiological error instead of trying to legitimize it with notions of "equality".

It is this kind of blind hatred that sets us as a people back. It is only your view that it is a defect or malfunction as you call it. Does someone being born gay harm you in any way? The answer is no. We need to get past our personal prejudices and accept people.
 
As marriage is NOT a constitutional issue; I find the outright modification of such a document to be highly inapropriate. The far right neo-nazi assholes responsible for this should lose the right to participate in politics.

What striking irony; your statements smack of Nazi attitudes. But that is the OBVIOUS hypocrisy we are growing used to when debating Liberals.
 
I think it's interesting that the same arguments used against homosexual marriage are the same arguments used against interracial marriage decades ago (against G-d, nature, decency, etc).

So I was a little disappointed to hear that Prop 8 was so popular with black voters the same year America elected its first black President. :(

The two are not the same. The interracial marriages were about race discrimination. The argument regarding marriage is not in the same category except for the hysterical drama coming from Liberals and Gay activists determined to shove their values down everyone's throats regardless of the Democratic process; it smacks of Nazi tactics; bullying, defiance and thuggery.

No one is making a GOOD case for Gay marriage with this kind of attitude and tactics. If anything, they are driving a deeper wedge, and that is fine with me. The intolerance of gays and Liberals for everyone who doesn't think like them is beginning to create a stench no one can abide by.
 
It is this kind of blind hatred that sets us as a people back. It is only your view that it is a defect or malfunction as you call it. Does someone being born gay harm you in any way? The answer is no. We need to get past our personal prejudices and accept people.

The hatred we are seeing is coming from the dramatic hysterics of Liberals like you. You hate anyone who doesn't conform to your absurd views and demagogue and spew your venom empty of any logic, tolerance or coherent thoughts.
 
The two are not the same. The interracial marriages were about race discrimination. The argument regarding marriage is not in the same category except for the hysterical drama coming from Liberals and Gay activists determined to shove their values down everyone's throats regardless of the Democratic process; it smacks of Nazi tactics; bullying, defiance and thuggery.
.

Wait a second here if gay were legal what is forced on you?
 
Wait a second here if gay were legal what is forced on you?

There is the religious definition of marriage used by many to limit it between man and woman. There is no doubt that the origin of this had very much religious roots. The government started issuing the marriage license and in doing so took marriage out of the church and put it into the realm of the state. The State can not discriminate the same way a church can, and the marriage contract is forged between two individuals but is being limited to man-woman. When those opposed to allowing same sex couples full use of their right to contract talk about morality being forced; they are talking from a historically religious argument. In that they view marriage as only man-woman, any attempt for same sex couples to alter that to allow themselves legal recognition of the State issued contract is then forcing a change in those values. They hold dear to the old definitions of marriage when it was once solely the realm of the church. But the problem is that it is no longer the realm of the church, the State stole it when it came up with the marriage license. And certain forms of discrimination through the State and changed and overthrown as time marches on.
 
What striking irony; your statements smack of Nazi attitudes. But that is the OBVIOUS hypocrisy we are growing used to when debating Liberals.

Some of the first victims of the Nazi's where gays, that is where the pink triangle comes from. The only hypocrisy is that the same right wing people who want the government out of their lives have no problem with adding it to the lives of fellow citizens who are gay.
 
Wait a second here if gay were legal what is forced on you?

Your narcissism aside, for many, homosexuality is not an accepted lifestyle. The schools will teach it as being "normal" against the wishes of parents, which it isn't, and law suits will arise for people who feel it goes against their religious beliefs and refuse to marry same sex couples.

I would ask the same question of the gay community; what is harming them by keeping marriage between a man and a woman as it has been for 2000 years?

This isn't about equality; this is about a tiny minority forcing their views on the majority to re-define what marriage means after 2000 years. How is life created; a test tube? No, it is the union of a man and a woman. Why is that so impossible to accept? What is FAIR about forcing a vast majority of people to re-define something that is sacred to them?

I am sure you believe in the theories that if it feels good, just do it. I have yet to see and undisciplined and immoral societies achieve any greatness. Now if you are for breaking our society down to the lowest common denominator, don't expect me, or others who support your minority views.

A much better solution is taking the “concept” of marriage and marriage certificates OUT of the Government and replacing it with a legal certificate of union; a contract between two individuals. Leave marriage for the churches. Much like Europe, marriage is a specifically religious process. You get a “license” from the State.

Makes BOTH sides happier and no longer requires the “State” to issue “marriage” certificates.
 
Some of the first victims of the Nazi's where gays, that is where the pink triangle comes from. The only hypocrisy is that the same right wing people who want the government out of their lives have no problem with adding it to the lives of fellow citizens who are gay.

Your dramatic hysterical arguments aside; equating the defining of marriage as being in the same category as the beating and murders conducted by Nazi's against gays just illustrates the absurdity of your arguments.

Spare us more of your nonsense; you embarrass yourself with every post.
 
A much better solution is taking the “concept” of marriage and marriage certificates OUT of the Government and replacing it with a legal certificate of union; a contract between two individuals. Leave marriage for the churches. Much like Europe, marriage is a specifically religious process. You get a “license” from the State.

This is the real, full solution. But good luck getting government to give up power over something it already has usurped.
 
Some of the first victims of the Nazi's where gays, that is where the pink triangle comes from. The only hypocrisy is that the same right wing people who want the government out of their lives have no problem with adding it to the lives of fellow citizens who are gay.
Californoa's Blacks, Lationos and Asians -- the people that carried this vote -- are right-wing?
 
Back
Top Bottom