New York State Senate Votes Down Gay Marriage Bill

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Dr_Patrick said:
That's interesting, because already it's been legalized in a few states. I don't recall them having to prove that it was genetic for those. Or are these simply your rules in some imaginary reality where you are the king? :lol:

Oh goody. Would you like to base your argument on the ones they made to allow it?

I remind you it was not done by public vote..

jallman · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

misterman said:
Come on.

.....

What is your problem this time?

TheNextEra · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

texmaster said:
Perhaps in your mind yes you have.

And perhaps in your mind I haven't, but I have provided those compelling reasons.

texmaster said:
If you claim that people need to be of a certain age to marry then you are making a moral judgment, the same moral judgment we have made as a society in over 30 states to reject gay marriage.

Yeah and we also at a time in the U.S. made interracial marriage illegal. Does the fact that it is not legal now make it irrelevant? Did the fact that interracial marriage was illegal at a time mean that it wouldn't be legal at some point?

Again, 30 years ago, gay marriage wasn't even able to make it on the ballot and now it has. Time is on the pro-gay marriage side and the anti-gay marriage crowd is losing each decade.

texmaster said:
My problem with people who are for gay marriage is many do not want to look at the doors it opens to other alternative lifestyles demanding the same thing they are.

Oh please, the same arguments were used when interracial marriage was made legal as well. The end of the world hasn't come.

If you just want to make gay marriage illegal because you are afraid of other things, you and others will lose in the end.

Tell me what are you going to do when gay marriage is made legal, leave the U.S.? Divorce your wife? Seriously, how is it going to affect you when it is made legal. My guess is, you will huff and pout, but will go on with your everyday life just as those people did that were against interracial marriage.

Dr_Patrick · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

texmaster said:
Actually the only thing the genetics argument has shown is that gay marriage supporters who use it must admit their basis is purely on faith since they can't prove its existence. :2wave:

Well, you won't see me arguing the genetics angle because it is still unproven. In a recent research study they were unable to find a specific gay gene, but it still could be genetic. See things are a lot more complex than you would like to believe. The fact that it is unproven means that neither argument (it is genetic vs. it isn't genetic) has sufficient data to back it up. However, I can tell you that your logic of "there isn't sufficient evidence to prove that it is genetic, so it must not be" is completely absurd and faulty logic. So, really...any way you look at it you are wrong.

Dr_Patrick · Dec 10, 2009

texmaster said:
Oh goody. Would you like to base your argument on the ones they made to allow it?

I remind you it was not done by public vote..

I could care less how it was done. It was done through legal channels. Just because you don't agree with the method doesn't make it any less legal. :lol:

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

TheNextEra said:
And perhaps in your mind I haven't, but I have provided those compelling reasons.

In your mind yes.

Yeah and we also at a time in the U.S. made interracial marriage illegal. Does the fact that it is not legal now make it irrelevant? Did the fact that interracial marriage was illegal at a time mean that it wouldn't be legal at some point?

Here we go again. Race is genetic. Homosexuality has never been proven to be so despite multiple attempts so you cannot relate the two.

Again, 30 years ago, gay marriage wasn't even able to make it on the ballot and now it has. Time is on the pro-gay marriage side and the anti-gay marriage crowd is losing each decade.

Yet in the year the democrats had sweeping victories in the most liberal states it could not pass could it?

Oh please, the same arguments were used when interracial marriage was made legal as well. The end of the world hasn't come.

If you just want to make gay marriage illegal because you are afraid of other things, you and others will lose in the end.

Tell me what are you going to do when gay marriage is made legal, leave the U.S.? Divorce your wife? Seriously, how is it going to affect you when it is made legal. My guess is, you will huff and pout, but will go on with your everyday life just as those people did that were against interracial marriage.

Again, race and homosexuality are not equal because one has been proven to be genetic while the other has not.

EpicDude86 · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Dr_Patrick said:
Well, you won't see me arguing the genetics angle because it is still unproven. In a recent research study they were unable to find a specific gay gene, but it still could be genetic. See things are a lot more complex than you would like to believe. The fact that it is unproven means that neither argument (it is genetic vs. it isn't genetic) has sufficient data to back it up. However, I can tell you that your logic of "there isn't sufficient evidence to prove that it is genetic, so it must not be" is completely absurd and faulty logic. So, really...any way you look at it you are wrong.

I don't think it's genetic but rather it is simply a chemical reaction. I don't think it's anymore genetic than say...your favorite food or color.

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Dr_Patrick said:
I could care less how it was done. It was done through legal channels. Just because you don't agree with the method doesn't make it any less legal. :lol:

I never said it wasn't legal as you well know.

The very fact you couldn't care less how it was done as long as it was in your favor shows you have no interest in debating the legitimacy of going over the people's head as long as you get what you want.

Sounds like a liberal cause to me :rofl

Dr_Patrick · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

EpicDude86 said:
I don't think it's genetic but rather it is simply a chemical reaction. I don't think it's anymore genetic than say...your favorite food or color.

That could be. Many people have different theories. However, you also aren't using faulty logic by making an absolute statement because there isn't sufficient data yet to back up the other side's argument.

jallman · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Dr_Patrick said:
Well, you won't see me arguing the genetics angle because it is still unproven. In a recent research study they were unable to find a specific gay gene, but it still could be genetic. See things are a lot more complex than you would like to believe. The fact that it is unproven means that neither argument (it is genetic vs. it isn't genetic) has sufficient data to back it up. However, I can tell you that your logic of "there isn't sufficient evidence to prove that it is genetic, so it must not be" is completely absurd and faulty logic. So, really...any way you look at it you are wrong.

However, it has been proven in model organisms that there is a gene that controls sexuality. It has been pin-pointed to the specific arm of a specific chromosome. There has been no success in switching it on and off but it is there.

That, however, does not make one bit of difference in terms of the gay marriage debate.

EpicDude86 · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Dr_Patrick said:
That could be. Many people have different theories. However, you also aren't using faulty logic by making an absolute statement because there isn't sufficient data yet to back up the other side's argument.

It's better to cover your ass in case you're wrong rather than look like an ass when you turn out to be wrong.

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Dr_Patrick said:
That could be. Many people have different theories. However, you also aren't using faulty logic by making an absolute statement because there isn't sufficient data yet to back up the other side's argument.

You still think you can pass the burden of proof on the people who don't see a need to change the law. Thats not how it works.

Dr_Patrick · Dec 10, 2009

texmaster said:
I never said it wasn't legal as you well know.

The very fact you couldn't care less how it was done as long as it was in your favor shows you have no interest in debating the legitimacy of going over the people's head as long as you get what you want.

Sounds like a liberal cause to me :rofl

Nah, not really. Honestly, even if all of the states that made it legal were to suddenly have a public vote which would make it illegal again it wouldn't worry me in the least. I guarantee that this issue isn't going away and it will keep going until it is made legal on a federal level. All of the things that are going on right now as far as certain states making it legal and whatever else is a part of the necessary struggling period.

Dr_Patrick · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

texmaster said:
You still think you can pass the burden of proof on the people who don't see a need to change the law. Thats not how it works.

That may be true, but we are having a discussion on a debate forum..and you don't represent the people who change the law. So, rather than pretending to be a mouthpiece for those people, perhaps you yourself could join in on the discussion and back up your assertions.

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Dr_Patrick said:
Nah, not really. Honestly, even if all of the states that made it legal were to suddenly have a public vote which would make it illegal again it wouldn't worry me in the least. I guarantee that this issue isn't going away and it will keep going until it is made legal on a federal level. All of the things that are going on right now as far as certain states making it legal and whatever else is a part of the necessary struggling period.

No one ever said it was going away. The entire subject is making the case for it but you have already admitted you could care less as long as it gets in there is no point in debating you.

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Dr_Patrick said:
That may be true, but we are having a discussion on a debate forum..and you don't represent the people who change the law. So, rather than pretending to be a mouthpiece for those people, perhaps you yourself could join in on the discussion and back up your assertions.

Again, you fail to understand that the burden of proof is on the people like yourself who want the law to change, not the people who see no need to change it.

disneydude · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

texmaster said:
That doesn't answer my question. How are they different?

Ok so you are claiming discrimination is the reason to allow gay marriage is that correct?

Again....you need to study equal protection law to understand the analysis. Take a few minutes and do some on-line research.

I can give you a 30 second lesson...but it probably won't help much.

A "suspect" class is a group of individuals that have characteristics that are inherent, such as race, gender, etc.

Homosexuality has not been treated as a suspect class. However, there is an intermediate class that the court sometimes employs. Sexual orientation has received treatment under this level. The idea being, the Court recognizing that sexual orientation MAY be inherent like race or gender...or it may not...thus, the court is not willing to extend suspect class status, but is willing to look at discrimination against groups based on sexual orientation with a higher level of scrutiny than it otherwise would.

Polygamy has no indicators of being a suspect class.

TheNextEra · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

texmaster said:
Yet in the year the democrats had sweeping victories in the most liberal states it could not pass could it?

Not all Democrats are liberal, nor do all dems support gay marriage so why would you expect it.

texmaster said:
Again, race and homosexuality are not equal because one has been proven to be genetic while the other has not.

It doesn't matter, making something illegal just because you are afraid of other non-related things happening is not a compelling reason to make it illegal.

You anti-gay marriage folks are losing the battle, it is apparent each and every decade.

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

disneydude said:
Again....you need to study equal protection law to understand the analysis. Take a few minutes and do some on-line research.

I can give you a 30 second lesson...but it probably won't help much.

A "suspect" class is a group of individuals that have characteristics that are inherent, such as race, gender, etc.

Homosexuality has not been treated as a suspect class.

Thats because it has not been proven to be genetic.

However, there is an intermediate class that the court sometimes employs. Sexual orientation has received treatment under this level. The idea being, the Court recognizing that sexual orientation MAY be inherent like race or gender...or it may not...thus, the court is not willing to extend suspect class status, but is willing to look at discrimination against groups based on sexual orientation with a higher level of scrutiny than it otherwise would.

Some courts have claimed this but it is not fact which is the point.

Polygamy has no indicators of being a suspect class.

Again, that does not answer my question as to how the arguments would be different for legalizing marriage for either group.

You can claim equal protection law all you like but if you cannot prove how they are different under the law you have no case to make the claim they are different.

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

TheNextEra said:
Not all Democrats are liberal, nor do all dems support gay marriage so why would you expect it.

I never did expect it. But many who support your side did.

It doesn't matter, making something illegal just because you are afraid of other non-related things happening is not a compelling reason to make it illegal.

I never said I was afraid. Please read more carefully.

You anti-gay marriage folks are losing the battle, it is apparent each and every decade.

Keep on hoping that

Dr_Patrick · Dec 10, 2009

texmaster said:
No one ever said it was going away. The entire subject is making the case for it but you have already admitted you could care less as long as it gets in there is no point in debating you.

And why do you think people need to make a case for it to you? Do you represent the people who are changing the law? :lol:

No, I could care less about which states make it legal or make it illegal simply because it's a symptom of the struggle period, as I said before. There isn't a doubt in my mind that it will eventually be made legal on a federal level. So, no...I'm not worried. Feel free to stop "debating" me, though. :lol:

texmaster · Dec 10, 2009

Dr_Patrick said:
And why do you think people need to make a case for it to you? Do you represent the people who are changing the law? :lol:

LOL Have you ever seen someone who put a bill forward and not make their case for what they want added to or changing a law and instead demanded the government make a case against it without an argument to do so?

Yes I'd like to change this law but I don't want to present my case to change it. YOU should present your case for why it should stay the same!!

You really are funny. :rofl

No, I could care less about which states make it legal or make it illegal simply because it's a symptom of the struggle period, as I said before. There isn't a doubt in my mind that it will eventually be made legal on a federal level. So, no...I'm not worried. Feel free to stop "debating" me, though. :lol:

Let me know when you actually are making a case and I will. The only thing you have done so far is capitulated you can't prove its genetic. :2wave:

Redress · Dec 10, 2009

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

EpicDude86 said:
I don't think it's genetic but rather it is simply a chemical reaction. I don't think it's anymore genetic than say...your favorite food or color.

How exactly do you think genetics works? Genes create proteins, which cause everything to happen. Genetics is chemical.

Dr_Patrick · Dec 10, 2009

texmaster said:
LOL Have you ever seen someone who put a bill forward and not make their case for what they want added to or changing a law and instead demanded the government make a case against it without an argument to do so?

Well, you can go on believing that the whole "genetics argument" is going to be a part of the case. Frankly, I don't think it will be..and if it will, it will be a very little part of it.

Yes I'd like to change this law but I don't want to present my case to change it. YOU should present your case for why it should stay the same!!

You really are funny. :rofl

I don't know why you think that people here have to present their case to you as if you are the one making the changes in the law. You aren't. We are simply having a discussion. The sooner you understand that, the better.

Let me know when you actually are making a case and I will. The only thing you have done so far is capitulated you can't prove its genetic. :2wave:

I'm not the one making the case anymore than you are the one who needs to hear the case in order to change the law. So, perhaps you should stop pretending that you are and we can have an actual discussion. :roll:

Redress · Dec 10, 2009

texmaster said:
It was not a claim. It was a conclusion based on the lack of evidence provided to substantiate an equal footing with race as many here have made long before I ever posted that conclusion.

You really need to read the entire thread next time.

Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex - life - 16 June 2008 - New Scientist

Brain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait.

The scans reveal that in gay people, key structures of the brain governing emotion, mood, anxiety and aggressiveness resemble those in straight people of the opposite sex

Oh look, evidence. See, I back up my claim, you have yet to offer one shred of evidence to support your claim. You have in fact made a statement that is not true, not accurate, not even remotely close to the real world. In point of fact, there are a large number of research papers on the topic of why people have a certain orientation, and a fair number support the idea that orientation is not learned or chosen. With this being the case, your claim that there is no evidence that people are created gay is false.

Care to try again?

New York State Senate Votes Down Gay Marriage Bill

Hippie Hater

Androgyne

Androgyne

Hippie Hater

Hippie Hater

Androgyne

Hippie Hater

Androgyne

Androgyne

Hippie Hater

Hippie Hater

Hippie Hater

Hippie Hater

Androgyne

Hippie Hater

Liberal Fascist For Life!

Androgyne

Liberal Fascist For Life!