• 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!

California Supreme Court Upholds Proposition 8

Oh one of them would be leaving the family home to the surviving spouse tax free.

Well then have the law changed. You are telling me that laws cannot be changed and that the ONLY solution is that we re-define what marriage means and its basic tenet with procreation?

Would it not be a hell of a lot easier to have the legislature change the law in cases where there is a gay union?
 
Nobody gets married anymore, the law in UK has actually legislated those who are living together for a extended amount of time have the rights of a married couple.

Gay marriage is in many European countries. Hasn't made no impact on marriage at all.

This is again a red herring argument as this is not about the impact on marriage, it is about the impact on SOCIETY and the basic structure of any society; the family unit which is a mom and a dad who creates the child. In fact, many European countries are experiencing an unprecedented decline in birth rates.
 
This is again a red herring argument as this is not about the impact on marriage, it is about the impact on SOCIETY and the basic structure of any society; the family unit which is a mom and a dad who creates the child. In fact, many European countries are experiencing an unprecedented decline in birth rates.

And how, exactly, does that translate into an argument against gay marriage? Is everyone in Europe marrying a gay now and that's why they aren't having babehz?
 
People who thought that blacks were second class citizens also thought people were attempting to SHOVE their views in their faces.....

so what's you point?

Attempting to equate racial inequality with marriage is specious and typifies the emotional hysterics made by those attempting to equivocate on this issue.

People did indeed see persons of race as inferior and attempted to deny them of their basic rights as a citizen. No one sees Gays as being inferior for the mere fact that they cannot get married in a traditional sense.

As a matter of fact, NO one disputes that gays should be able to have civil unions and property rights. They just have issues with re-defining what marriage means.
 
This is again a red herring argument as this is not about the impact on marriage, it is about the impact on SOCIETY and the basic structure of any society; the family unit which is a mom and a dad who creates the child. In fact, many European countries are experiencing an unprecedented decline in birth rates.

Yeah but who wants children tbh.
I doubt the declining birth rate has anything to do with marriage and its decline but probably the decline of religion and the control females have over their womb.
 
Last edited:
And how, exactly, does that translate into an argument against gay marriage? Is everyone in Europe marrying a gay now and that's why they aren't having babehz?

Not enough Gays for everyone in Europe to get one unfortunately.
 
That's one of the things that always surprised me; how ****ing stupid do straight people think I am when they look at me with a straight face and tell me that butt sex is going to ruin marriage whereas 50% divorces and Brittainy Spears' 20 something hour marriage doesn't?

And yet, no one has ever told you this or even made such an asinine argument. How profound that you have to once more fabricate an argument to support your position on this issue.

Trust me, a vast majority who are on my side of this issue including myself, could care less who or how many times you want to have BUTT sex; that's your business and as long as you don't, excuse the pun, shove it in our faces, we could care less.
 
What about Church going gay couples who have children from previous hetero marriages before they came out? They are spiritual/Presbyterian and are following the tradition of raising kids. Should they be allowed to marry supposing it was legal?

I know a lesbian couple who are this example.

So we should legislate based on remote exceptions?
 
Attempting to equate racial inequality with marriage is specious and typifies the emotional hysterics made by those attempting to equivocate on this issue.

People did indeed see persons of race as inferior and attempted to deny them of their basic rights as a citizen. No one sees Gays as being inferior for the mere fact that they cannot get married in a traditional sense.

As a matter of fact, NO one disputes that gays should be able to have civil unions and property rights. They just have issues with re-defining what marriage means.

That is EXACTLY what the anti-gay marriage crowd is doing....saying "your relationships are inferior to ours and therefore not entitled to the same protections".

That is EXACTLY what discrimination is always about...a view by one group that they are superior and therefore entitled to more than another group.

As for the second part of your argument.....the anti-gay crowd was VERY against civil unions until they started to realize that their "sacred" institution of marriage might be found to be unconstitutional for discriminating against gays...all of a sudden they were all for civil unions.
 
Last edited:
This one is headed to the SCOTUS.
The California Supreme Count acceded to the rightful will of the people.
The Supreme Count should do the same and be "man" enough to not even hear the case.
This crap must end.
The media have blown it all out of proportion as it is such a controversial issue..
Is marriage a right ?...a Constitutional right ?
Is homosexuality normal or abnormal ?
IMO, its no more normal than a man being insane, or being blind..
Marriage is obviously NOT a right.
So, why all this commotion and fuss ?
 
The California Supreme Count acceded to the rightful will of the people.
The Supreme Count should do the same and be "man" enough to not even hear the case.
This crap must end.
The media have blown it all out of proportion as it is such a controversial issue..
Is marriage a right ?...a Constitutional right ?
Is homosexuality normal or abnormal ?
IMO, its no more normal than a man being insane, or being blind..
Marriage is obviously NOT a right.
So, why all this commotion and fuss ?

So when do we get to put your Constitutional rights to a vote?
 
US Divorce Rates For Various Faith Groups

Religion % have been divorced
Jews 30%
Born-again Christians 27%
Other Christians 24%
Atheists, Agnostics 21%

Hmm...that kind of destroys your theory a bit.

Hmmm...no it doesn't.

I'm not talking about people who get married in a Christian church. I'm talking about actively spiritual people who understand the nature of the commitment they're making.

A lot of people get married in a church, then never see one outside of Candlelight service on Christmas Eve for the next 10 years.
 
The California Supreme Count acceded to the rightful will of the people.
The Supreme Count should do the same and be "man" enough to not even hear the case.
This crap must end.
The media have blown it all out of proportion as it is such a controversial issue..
Is marriage a right ?...a Constitutional right ?
Is homosexuality normal or abnormal ?
IMO, its no more normal than a man being insane, or being blind..
Marriage is obviously NOT a right.
So, why all this commotion and fuss ?
Because anti gay marriage folks are regulating the lives of people they don't know based on thier Judeo Christian values.
 
HOLY ****!! I leave for one hour and this thread has taken off like a Rocket! o_O Whoa!
 
For the record, Obama supports this ruling. But let's ignore that, and get back to bashing the beauty pageant winner!!!
 
And yet, no one has ever told you this or even made such an asinine argument. How profound that you have to once more fabricate an argument to support your position on this issue.

Trust me, a vast majority who are on my side of this issue including myself, could care less who or how many times you want to have BUTT sex; that's your business and as long as you don't, excuse the pun, shove it in our faces, we could care less.

It's called a hyperbole and I would have thought one of your supposed mental genius would have recognized that. :doh

And who is shoving anything in your face? Is anyone requiring you, by law to take part in or even attend a gay marriage?
 
For the record, Obama supports this ruling. But let's ignore that, and get back to bashing the beauty pageant winner!!!

Beauty pageant? .... :confused:
 
That and their little smear campaign trying to convince the uneducated public that the big bad homos were bullying the words "mom" and "dad" out of schools.

It was shameful what they did but I'll be damned if we trust in their good Christian honesty next time around. **** the mormons and every other fundamental whackjob church that helped them with Prop 8.


Don't forget all the Obama voters that helped pass it, too.
 
Beauty pageant? .... :confused:

It was something that happened here in the US. A beauty pageant contestant was asked a question about gay marriage by a fat, smelly little faggot who then used her respectful answer to bash her in the media afterward.

It was much ado about nothing.
 
"In a sense, petitioners' and the attorney general's complaint is that it is just too easy to amend the California Constitution through the initiative process. But it is not a proper function of this court to curtail that process; we are constitutionally bound to uphold it," the ruling said.

California high court upholds gay marriage ban

Not sure how you can disagree with this.
 
This is a tough issue for everyone. I don't know why people feel the need to shove it in someones face.

As I said before I am torn on the issue and I feel for people like Jallman and Inferno who have a much more personal stake in it than I do. To be honest I do not support gay marriage at all. But a nagging little voice from the past keeps saying in this secular country, it would be the right thing to do.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom