• 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

veganshawn said:
I am going to personally commit myself to making sure that any church that opposes gay marriage has its tax free status revoked.
Click to expand...
Based on... what?
 
veganshawn said:
I am going to personally commit myself to making sure that any church that opposes gay marriage has its tax free status revoked.
Click to expand...

That goes way over the line for me.
 
This election was an auction of greed and the singular question of "what's in it for me?" Biden even gave us the example of give nothing to charity.

Why would I support gay rights? I'm not gay. There's nothing supporting equality for gays to me.

It is very appropriate that the voting blocks that caused Obama's primary and then general election win voted down equality for gays.

That's a "ha ha."
 
Goobieman said:
Merely holding the position that gays should not marry doesnt qualify as politcal campaigning.
Click to expand...

Funding the campaigns to make sure that it didn't pass is political campaigning.
 
Bonnie1988 said:
Why would I support gay rights? I'm not gay.
Click to expand...

I have seen a lot of ignorant and sad stuff on here, but this might just take the cake. So you should only support the rights of people just like you?
 
veganshawn said:
Funding the campaigns to make sure that it didn't pass is political campaigning.
Click to expand...
Perhaps... but you said "any church that opposes gay marriage".
Obviously, you can oppose gay marriage without going so far as to fund a campaign to that effect.
 
Goobieman said:
Perhaps... but you said "any church that opposes gay marriage".
Obviously, you can oppose gay marriage without going so far as to fund a campaign to that effect.
Click to expand...

I will give you that, I will make sure that any church who knowingly funded Prop H8te should be stripped of their tax free status!
 
veganshawn said:
I will give you that, I will make sure that any church who knowingly funded Prop H8te should be stripped of their tax free status!
Click to expand...
Yes, well, good luck with that. :mrgreen:
 
veganshawn said:
I have seen a lot of ignorant and sad stuff on here, but this might just take the cake. So you should only support the rights of people just like you?
Click to expand...
That's what this election was all about. I'm just being an American as people voted we should be. I see no reason for constitutional equality for gays when there is no constitutional equality for women.
 
Last edited:
Bonnie1988 said:
That's what this election was all about. I'm just being an American as people voted we should be.
Click to expand...
The left is famous for only caring about the rights they like.
That's no different than not caring about gay rights when you arent gay.
 
Goobieman said:
The left is famous for only caring about the rights they like.
That's no different than not caring about gay rights when you arent gay.
Click to expand...

There were plenty of men who supported women's suffrage. There were plenty of white people who opposed segregation. And there are plenty of straight people who support gay marriage, unless you're going to conclude that 47% of Californians are gay. :roll:
 
disneydude said:
Allowing blacks to sit in the front of the bus and to drink from the same drinking fountains as the rest of society probably offended many on the "right" as well. But we changed the laws in spite of it because the laws were unfair, discriminatory and wrong.
Click to expand...

Once again you make arguments empty of FACTS. Those people who prevented blacks from having those rights were not on the RIGHT. They were Southern Democrats.

It was a Republican who fought the most devastating War in American history to free the slaves and who gave the Emancipation Proclamation.

It was a Democrat that passed Civil Rights Legislation, JFK, which the blacks mistakenly believe is the party that cares about them. Yet after decades of Democrat politics, all we see as a result of Blacks reliance on Democrats is a dependent class of voters and the erosion of family values as a result of well intentioned Democrat welfare programs.

Again, the argument that race is the same as marriage is the realm of dramatic hysterics and the attempt to suggest that people who disagree with you must "hate". But this is hyperbole and disingenuous in the extreme. But then, we are talking about extremists who are not interested in justice but rather shoving their political agenda down the throats of mainstream America and further driving a wedge between the two.

The protesting and ranting we are now seeing by these radical extremists to make this a National referendum will not win any allies; but rather have the OPPOSITE affect and push those who would support Civil Unions further away. I look forward to seeing this go all the way to the Supreme Court.

The hate we are seeing comes from YOUR side, not mine. And your HATE is driving a wedge in any support people like me may have for your issue because it is rapidly becoming apparent that you don’t seek a solution, but rather pushes an agenda; one people like me will NEVER support regardless of your divisive offensive hate rhetoric.

Carry on.
 
disneydude said:
I doubt it. Americans may be slow to evolve, but eventually they get it right.

America has a history of treating blacks and other racial minorities and women as second class citizens. Eventually we have come around. Today, America treats gays as second class citizens. Its just a matter of time, whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...


If that is so how do you explain that more and more states are adopting constitutional amendments banning gay marriage?:confused:
 
Dazed And Confused

"Dazed And Confused"
Macintosh said:
Monk-Eye said:
Macinslosh said:
I cited four Supreme Court cases which directly contradict your idiotic statement that Equal Protection is afforded to citizens only.
Click to expand...
That is blatantly false and absolutely stupid.
Click to expand...
Really? So, you didn't write a nice, long, lame bit about how I could legally murder an illegal immigrant because they are not, in your view, granted Equal Protection? You didn't say to my question, "So, yes, be very ware"? Would you like me to post the link to the post in which you said this, or, will you admit that you're now trying to save face?
Click to expand...
Verily, I am trying to figure out how you could draw the moronic conclusion (without yourself actually being a moron), as indicated directly above, that I stated only citizens are entitled to equal protection, based on my assertion (of the strictest interpretation) that non-citizens, which are illegally present, are not under US jurisdiction and therefore not entitled to equal protection.
Macintosh said:
I never said contrary arguments do not exist. They're just, well, the minority and have no constitutional foundation whatsoever. That is apparent to anyone with even a slight understanding of Constitutional Law, of which you have none.
Click to expand...
Opinions which you do not agree with are judicial activism, and opinions you agree with are constitutional, that is classic idiocy.
Macintosh said:
Who the hell was arguing inalienable rights? Equal Protection is what I was arguing, and you damn well know it. You just can't refute my arguments because, well, your logic has not found its way into "mainstream consideration."
Click to expand...
You are running away again like a coward.
You quoted the unalienable (endowed by creator) words of the preamble as the source of "natural rights" (conventional definition is faulty) which you promptly extended to anything you deemed a person.
My proposition stipulated that the laws of the institution are based on positive law, not "natural law" (conventional definition is faulty), wherefore the laws are drafted in the initial contexts for citizens at the exclusion of all else.
Moreover, I expounded that equal protection cannot abate, and must be compliant with, the requirements incumbent upon a citizen to receive rights, most notably, the specific requirement of birth. (off topic)
Permit this preamble comic assay - (all MEN - literally unincluding females?) :lol:
Macintosh said:
It's "buffoonery," not "bafoonery." It's "dementia," not "dimentia." So, about your brilliance...
Click to expand...
Does this trump your first rung of stupidity cited in this post?
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
Thats the same thing they said to Blacks on the back of the bus.....hell....we allow you to ride don't we.......get over it.
Click to expand...

sour grapes...........blacks are people defined by their race.......gays are defined by their sexual oreintation.........huge difference........
 
Navy Pride said:
sour grapes...........blacks are people defined by their race.......gays are defined by their sexual oreintation.........huge difference........
Click to expand...
No difference, as no one chooses either. And no difference, as you shouldn't hate anyone for the way they are born, and are not entitled to deprive them of their rights because of the way they are born.
 
faminedynasty said:
No difference, as no one chooses either. And no difference, as you shouldn't hate anyone for the way they are born, and are not entitled to deprive them of their rights because of the way they are born.
Click to expand...



That is totally up for debate when it comes to gays and I hate no one.........I just have a difference of opinion on the issue then you do.........Why is that not possible with the people on the left?
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
If that is so how do you explain that more and more states are adopting constitutional amendments banning gay marriage?:confused:
Click to expand...

Yes....because the bigots on the right are becoming scared of what is coming. They are trying to put up these walls, but eventually they will all fall. Most likely even within your lifetime.
 
Navy Pride said:
That is totally up for debate when it comes to gays and I hate no one.........I just have a difference of opinion on the issue then you do.........Why is that not possible with the people on the left?
Click to expand...
I know I dont need to tell you this, but liberals simply assume that any disagreement you have with them is based in hate and fear.

After all, they, our intellectual betters, simply cannot imagine any other reason why anyone would disagree with them.
 
Navy Pride said:
sour grapes...........blacks are people defined by their race.......gays are defined by their sexual oreintation.........huge difference........
Click to expand...

There is no difference. Anyone who believes that any American is not entitled to the same rights/privileges as any other American is a bigot.

I am certain the racists who fought against the civil rights laws didn't consider themselves bigots either. Afterall, they were on the right....god was on their side.

Homophobia is simply the last bastion of bigotry in the United States and like the rest, it will fall as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom