• 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!

New York State Senate Votes Down Gay Marriage Bill

Ted Stryker said:
No one said anything about being forced to marry a gay person. What is being imposed is the redefinition of the institution of marriage and, by extension, the American family. Neither institution is the exclusive property of the left such that they may do with them as they please.
Click to expand...

How is your family "redefined" by gay marriage?
 
Goobieman said:
Once you decide that "man and woman" is no longer a fundamental paet of marriage, then there is no sound argument to limiti marriage to two people.
Click to expand...

You don't need that argument to justify polygamy. It stands on its own.
 
Goobieman said:
Once you decide that "man and woman" is no longer a fundamental paet of marriage, then there is no sound argument to limiti marriage to two people.
Click to expand...

Once again....Goobie demonstrates that he doesn't understand Equal Protection analysis.
 
texmaster said:
So

#1 You can't prove its genetic

#2 You can't even prove a genetic link in even 60% of homosexuals.

Got it.

Thanks.



0-31 with 2 losses in the biggest year Democrats have had in an election in decades.

You are going to have to face that fact.

BTW, your pathetic attempt to claim because it hasn't been disproven as genetic somehow validates your claim is only another sign of desperation.

What about bi sexuals? What about the people who marry, have kids, then "turn gay". Are you going to claim they are genetic too? :rofl
Click to expand...

Personally, I could care less whether it's genetic or not. Being attracted to someone of the same sex is just as legitimate as being attracted to the opposite sex. I have yet to see a legitimate argument from anyone as to why gay marriage shouldn't be allowed. I don't think that the government should step in and force every church to recognize homosexual marriage if it is against their ideology. I also don't think that any religion should be able to get their anti-gay marriage ideology legislated. No single religion holds a monopoly on marriage and what the definition of it is. End of story.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
Personally, I could care less whether it's genetic or not.
Click to expand...

It shouldn't matter one bit.

Religion isn't genetic either, yet it is protected by many anti-discrimination laws, and the constitution. The idea that something has to be "immutable" to be protected is silly.
 
misterman said:
It shouldn't matter one bit.

Religion isn't genetic either, yet it is protected by many anti-discrimination laws, and the constitution. The idea that something has to be "immutable" to be protected is silly.
Click to expand...

I just find that one of the main arguments that pro-gay marriage people use is that being gay is genetic. There has been no scientific proof of this that I could find. I couldn't care less whether it's genetic or not. Does it have to be genetic to be legitimate?
 
Dr_Patrick said:
I just find that one of the main arguments that pro-gay marriage people use is that being gay is genetic. There has been no scientific proof of this that I could find. I couldn't care less whether it's genetic or not. Does it have to be genetic to be legitimate?
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. I agree. Like I said, religion isn't genetic either.

It's really silly to say being gay is a choice though. Who would choose that? How does one choose what they like?

Whenever someone says it's a choice, I ask them "when did you choose to be straight? Was it a tough decision? Did you weigh the pros and cons?"
 
misterman said:
No, it doesn't. I agree. Like I said, religion isn't genetic either.

It's really silly to say being gay is a choice though. Who would choose that? How does one choose what they like?

Whenever someone says it's a choice, I ask them "when did you choose to be straight? Was it a tough decision? Did you weigh the pros and cons?"
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a choice either. Obviously, nobody would choose a lifestyle where they could risk being cast aside by both friends and family.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
I don't think it's a choice either. Obviously, nobody would choose a lifestyle where they could risk being cast aside by both friends and family.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

And hey, who you want to have sex with can't be a choice. You don't choose what you like, you just like it. What kind of guy is heterosexual and then one day says "gee, I think I'll start liking to have sex with boys instead?"
 
texmaster said:
So

#1 You can't prove its genetic

#2 You can't even prove a genetic link in even 60% of homosexuals.

Got it.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

#1 and #2 neither can you.

texmaster said:
0-31 with 2 losses in the biggest year Democrats have had in an election in decades.

You are going to have to face that fact.
Click to expand...

And yet again, 30 years ago, this wouldn't have even been voted on. It's called progress and only the blind don't see that it will eventually pass. It may take another 10-20 years but it will happen. Sorry that progression is on our side and the anti-gay marriage crowd grows smaller and smaller over time.

texmaster said:
BTW, your pathetic attempt to claim because it hasn't been disproven as genetic somehow validates your claim is only another sign of desperation.

What about bi sexuals? What about the people who marry, have kids, then "turn gay". Are you going to claim they are genetic too? :rofl
Click to expand...

Just because someone marries, has children, and then decides that their true feelings are gay does not mean they weren't from birth.

Perhaps they were just afraid to come out being gay because of ignorant homophopes that would choose to ostracize them in society.

You claim that NOONE is gay from birth and just chooses to be an outcast in society. Yeah right.
 
TheNextEra said:
#1 and #2 neither can you.
Click to expand...

Um, I'm not the one trying to prove its genetic. That would be you. :roll:

And yet again, 30 years ago, this wouldn't have even been voted on. It's called progress and only the blind don't see that it will eventually pass. It may take another 10-20 years but it will happen. Sorry that progression is on our side and the anti-gay marriage crowd grows smaller and smaller over time.
Click to expand...

You keep the faith because its all you've got :D

Just because someone marries, has children, and then decides that their true feelings are gay does not mean they weren't from birth.
Click to expand...

See now thats funny. So they "endured" a heterosexual relationship for decades only to discover later their true "genetic" calling was for a homosexual relationship?

Thanks for the laugh :rofl

I see you ducked bi-sexuals.

Hmm why is that I wonder?

Perhaps they were just afraid to come out being gay because of ignorant homophopes that would choose to ostracize them in society.
Click to expand...

All theory no fact. Something I've grown quite accustomed to in your arguments.

You claim that NOONE is gay from birth and just chooses to be an outcast in society. Yeah right.
Click to expand...

I never said that.

I think there are about 2-3% of the gay community that actually have a hormonal imbalance like hermaphrodites.
 
misterman said:
How is your family "redefined" by gay marriage?
Click to expand...

resistance to change sometimes doesn't have a logical answer. :lol: Some people think that, for whatever reason, if gays get the word marriage too, that society has taken a step down the road to total degeneracy. Me personally, I think the Gays should stop trying to get a word, and just try and get the equal rights, they can worry about words later when more people don't care so strongly.
 
EpicDude86 said:
resistance to change sometimes doesn't have a logical answer. :lol: Some people think that, for whatever reason, if gays get the word marriage too, that society has taken a step down the road to total degeneracy. Me personally, I think the Gays should stop trying to get a word, and just try and get the equal rights, they can worry about words later when more people don't care so strongly.
Click to expand...

Rights are never equal if they are seperate. We already learned this lesson once.
 
jallman said:
Rights are never equal if they are seperate. We already learned this lesson once.
Click to expand...

But life isn't fair, and having a different name for the same thing is far better than not having it at all. Not to mention, it's one step forward instead of going in circles. People need to learn to GIVE and take, not just TAKE TAKE TAKE until I think everything's "fair" for me. It's not the happy sunshine and rainbows we want it to be but then again, that's life.
 
EpicDude86 said:
But life isn't fair, and having a different name for the same thing is far better than not having it at all. Not to mention, it's one step forward instead of going in circles. People need to learn to GIVE and take, not just TAKE TAKE TAKE until I think everything's "fair" for me. It's not the happy sunshine and rainbows we want it to be but then again, that's life.
Click to expand...

Maybe the anti gay marriage should stop taking....
 
EpicDude86 said:
resistance to change sometimes doesn't have a logical answer. :lol: Some people think that, for whatever reason, if gays get the word marriage too, that society has taken a step down the road to total degeneracy. Me personally, I think the Gays should stop trying to get a word, and just try and get the equal rights, they can worry about words later when more people don't care so strongly.
Click to expand...

I agree on the word thing. To sacrifice everything for a word is silly.

I guess this means I'm not a troll any more?
 
jallman said:
That's not an argument when it comes to legality.
Click to expand...

What laws that have tried to govern 'fairness' and 'equality' that were met with little to no resistance and accomplished exactly what they were set out to do? I mean, I can't think of any off the top of my head so I just want another viewpoint. :D
 
misterman said:
I agree on the word thing. To sacrifice everything for a word is silly.

I guess this means I'm not a troll any more?
Click to expand...

You were getting pretty close last night. I'll just settle for you being belligerently staunch in your views with moments of clarity ;)

:kissy:
 
EpicDude86 said:
But life isn't fair
Click to expand...

The law should be.

But this isn't really a fairness issue. Marriage isn't a "right" in the sense that anyone should have legal blessing to marry anyone else, otherwise we wouldn't have any marriage qualifications at all. (That said, I do agree with Va. v. Loving, before anyone brings it up).
 
EpicDude86 said:
;) You were getting pretty close last night. I'll just settle for you being belligerently staunch in your views with moments of clarity ;)
Click to expand...

Staunch I am.

Last night I was just frustrated, justifiably I think.

:kissy:
Click to expand...

Hey, no kissing until we're married, or at least civil unioned.
 
misterman said:
The law should be.

But this isn't really a fairness issue. Marriage isn't a "right" in the sense that anyone should have legal blessing to marry anyone else, otherwise we wouldn't have any marriage qualifications at all. (That said, I do agree with Va. v. Loving, before anyone brings it up).
Click to expand...

The law isn't supposed to create fairness rather it's to protect those who cannot protect themselves or get what they need. Marriage as a word is not a need, the rights granted by it arguably are.
 
jallman said:
Rights are never equal if they are seperate. We already learned this lesson once.
Click to expand...

Rights are afforded equally, I'm heterosexual, I cannot marry within gender either.
 
EpicDude86 said:
Yeah, I saw it in most of your posts, there was a kind of GRRRRR energy coming off you ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, when you explain over and over something that is indisputable fact (incorporation of the 14th amendment as accepted legal doctrine) and people just come back with the same old stuff base on their ignorance, it gets old. You can disagree with it, but don't tell me it doesn't exist.

Then there was the guy who thought "respecting an establishment of religion" meant I had respect for something. :rofl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom