• 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

Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Dr_Patrick said:
:rofl And now you are getting defensive? Actually, I'm not sure if you are aware of this or not, but this is a public forum. If you want to submit private messages to other people, feel free to PM them. Otherwise, deal with it. :2wave:
Click to expand...
If you want to act like a dungeon master, why don't you do it in the dungeon?
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Navy Pride said:
Why don't you address the topic of the thread? Why attack me?
Click to expand...

Navy, you rarely..if ever... discuss the topic of the thread. You constantly resort to personal attacks based on your own political bias. If you don't like what I have to say feel free to put me on ignore. :2wave:
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

American said:
If you want to act like a dungeon master, why don't you do it in the dungeon?
Click to expand...

I think Navy is capable of fighting his own battles. You can also feel free to put me on ignore as well.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Dr_Patrick said:
Navy, you rarely..if ever... discuss the topic of the thread. You constantly resort to personal attacks based on your own political bias. If you don't like what I have to say feel free to put me on ignore. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Nah, your left wing view is still worth a laugh............
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Navy Pride said:
Nah, your left wing view is still worth a laugh............
Click to expand...

I have never seen someone quote a message and then prove it right like that.

I....can't...stop.....laughing.

But on-topic, most likely all of these votes against Gay Marriage will mean very little if the Supreme Court of the United States of America gets involved.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

ScottD said:
I have never seen someone quote a message and then prove it right like that.

I....can't...stop.....laughing.

But on-topic, most likely all of these votes against Gay Marriage will mean very little if the Supreme Court of the United States of America gets involved.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be to sure of that my left wing friend...The SCOTUS presently 4 liberals and 4 conservatives with Hennedy as the tie breaker who leans right........I would say the court will never touch the gay marriage issue with 31 states voting against it and many more with DOMAs the the court will not get involved in state issues.............

That should stop your laughing.....:rofl
 
Dr_Patrick said:
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.
Click to expand...

That still does not address what I just said about your argument here. You want someone who does agree with you to prove your argument is wrong before you can support it yourself.

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.
Click to expand...

:rofl See this is called a debate. If you want to argue for something, it kind of helps to actually have an argument of your own first before you attack the other side to "prove you wrong"

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:
Click to expand...

This is really pathetic on your part. YOU want the law changed. Therefore, YOU need to make the argument to change it. Not try and throw it back on the other side who sees no need to change it before you ever make your argument to change it.

I must admit, its an original approach by you. I've never seen anyone demanding proof that their argument is invalid before ever making it themselves.

Good one :2wave:
 
Redress said:
Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex - life - 16 June 2008 - New Scientist



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?
Click to expand...

No problem. Destroying what you consider proof isn't hard.

From that very study:

This is significant, she says, and fits with data showing that women are three times as likely as men to suffer from mood disorders or depression. Gay men have higher rates of depression too, she says, but it's difficult to know whether this is down to biology, homophobia or simply feelings of being "different"....

But as Savic herself acknowledges, the study can't say whether the brain differences are inherited, or result from abnormally high or low exposure in the womb to sex hormones such as testosterone.

Nice try but they never once prove this alimony is found only in gay individuals or that its sole cause is homosexuality as Taylor and the very scientist who conducted the study herself admitted.

See its not "evidence" if it can't prove your argument.

Nice try. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

disneydude said:
I refuse to believe that you are that dense. I think you are being obtuse.

The answer is right before your eyes....unless you continue to refuse to comprehend the texts.
Click to expand...

Yes yes. Because you cannot prove your argument is correct, I must be obtuse. :spin:
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Navy Pride said:
I wouldn't be to sure of that my left wing friend...The SCOTUS presently 4 liberals and 4 conservatives with Hennedy as the tie breaker who leans right........I would say the court will never touch the gay marriage issue with 31 states voting against it and many more with DOMAs the the court will not get involved in state issues.............

That should stop your laughing.....:rofl
Click to expand...

Keep telling yourself that Navy...and you will be ill prepared for when gay marriage is a reality even in your lifetime.

What the SCOTUS does is not dependent upon the popular vote of the states, in fact, its usually exactly the opposite as the Constitution exists to protect against the tyranny of the majority.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

texmaster said:
Yes yes. Because you cannot prove your argument is correct, I must be obtuse. :spin:
Click to expand...

No...its because I have posted the reasons several times and you continue to say "I don't see it".
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

disneydude said:
No...its because I have posted the reasons several times and you continue to say "I don't see it".
Click to expand...

No, you haven't. You've pieced together theories then claim its factual evidence.

You cite a claim that I have to understand "equal protection law" to understand how you can claim polygamy and gay marriage are not equal yet you fail miserably to back up your claim.
 
texmaster said:
No problem. Destroying what you consider proof isn't hard.

From that very study:

This is significant, she says, and fits with data showing that women are three times as likely as men to suffer from mood disorders or depression. Gay men have higher rates of depression too, she says, but it's difficult to know whether this is down to biology, homophobia or simply feelings of being "different"....

But as Savic herself acknowledges, the study can't say whether the brain differences are inherited, or result from abnormally high or low exposure in the womb to sex hormones such as testosterone.

Nice try but they never once prove this alimony is found only in gay individuals or that its sole cause is homosexuality as Taylor and the very scientist who conducted the study herself admitted.

See its not "evidence" if it can't prove your argument.

Nice try. :2wave:
Click to expand...

You are not following at all what is being pointed out to you. It is evidence, it is not proof. Nowhere have I made any concrete statements(unlike you). I have offered evidence which shows that there may be a genetic component to orientation, you have offered zero evidence that there cannot be, which is your claim. You, like evolution deniers, look to do nothing more than complain about every study, as if somehow that means your view must be right. Science does not work that you. You have a hypothesis, that gays are not "created", but you have done nothing to back up this hypothesis.

Here is another one: PLoS ONE: Sexually Antagonistic Selection in Human Male Homosexuality

Several lines of evidence indicate the existence of genetic factors influencing male homosexuality and bisexuality. In spite of its relatively low frequency, the stable permanence in all human populations of this apparently detrimental trait constitutes a puzzling ‘Darwinian paradox’. Furthermore, several studies have pointed out relevant asymmetries in the distribution of both male homosexuality and of female fecundity in the parental lines of homosexual vs. heterosexual males. A number of hypotheses have attempted to give an evolutionary explanation for the long-standing persistence of this trait, and for its asymmetric distribution in family lines; however a satisfactory understanding of the population genetics of male homosexuality is lacking at present. We perform a systematic mathematical analysis of the propagation and equilibrium of the putative genetic factors for male homosexuality in the population, based on the selection equation for one or two diallelic loci and Bayesian statistics for pedigree investigation. We show that only the two-locus genetic model with at least one locus on the X chromosome, and in which gene expression is sexually antagonistic (increasing female fitness but decreasing male fitness), accounts for all known empirical data. Our results help clarify the basic evolutionary dynamics of male homosexuality, establishing this as a clearly ascertained sexually antagonistic human trait.
Click to expand...

Again, this does not prove that orientation is genetic, but is, once again, definite evidence to the possibility which you deny.

Now, you care to present any evidence to actually back your claim, or are you going to admit that you have no evidence that orientation cannot be hereditary?
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

texmaster said:
No, you haven't. You've pieced together theories then claim its factual evidence.

You cite a claim that I have to understand "equal protection law" to understand how you can claim polygamy and gay marriage are not equal yet you fail miserably to back up your claim.
Click to expand...

You obviously don't understand the analysis then. I explained to you the different levels of analysis. I explained the different levels that each would likely be analyzed under and explained why.
Like I said...you are either being obtuse or you should spend a few minutes and read up on equal protection analysis. Your lack of ability to understand is not due to my lack of trying.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

disneydude said:
Keep telling yourself that Navy...and you will be ill prepared for when gay marriage is a reality even in your lifetime.

What the SCOTUS does is not dependent upon the popular vote of the states, in fact, its usually exactly the opposite as the Constitution exists to protect against the tyranny of the majority.
Click to expand...



It seems like gay marriage and gays in general are the only thing you care about......Tell me DD are you Gay, not that there is anything wrong with it as they use to say on Seinfeld...You are really fascinated by the gay lifestyle........
 
Last edited:
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Navy Pride said:
It seems like gay marriage and gays in general are the only thing you care about......Tell me DD are you Gay, not that there is anything wrong with it as they use to say on Seinfeld...You are really fascinated by the gay lifestyle........
Click to expand...

There are a lot of things that I care about Navy. I could say that you are obsessed with gay marriage but I know that it isn't the only thing that you write about, just one of the most.

The reality is...I am concerned with fairness and justice for all of my fellow human beings. Whether they are gay/straight, male/female, black/white/asian/arab/latino/etc....
Until there is justice and equality for all, I will never be satisfied.
I believe strongly in the teaching "In as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethen....you have done it unto me".
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

disneydude said:
There are a lot of things that I care about Navy. I could say that you are obsessed with gay marriage but I know that it isn't the only thing that you write about, just one of the most.

The reality is...I am concerned with fairness and justice for all of my fellow human beings. Whether they are gay/straight, male/female, black/white/asian/arab/latino/etc....
Until there is justice and equality for all, I will never be satisfied.
I believe strongly in the teaching "In as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethen....you have done it unto me".
Click to expand...

If you stop seeking Fairness and just go for Justice, you'll be a lot happier. :) It requires a good bit of objectivity however.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

EpicDude86 said:
If you stop seeking Fairness and just go for Justice, you'll be a lot happier. :) It requires a good bit of objectivity however.
Click to expand...

Justice should always be fair. That is one of the problems that I have with this country.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

disneydude said:
Justice should always be fair. That is one of the problems that I have with this country.
Click to expand...

Justice should always be JUST. If Justice were always fair, it would rarely be balanced.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

EpicDude86 said:
Justice should always be JUST. If Justice were always fair, it would rarely be balanced.
Click to expand...

That's the problem...justice is rarely ever balanced. If this country would actually strive to be fair with our justice...I think we would be a better country than we are.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

disneydude said:
That's the problem...justice is rarely ever balanced. If this country would actually strive to be fair with our justice...I think we would be a better country than we are.
Click to expand...

We'd be broke (even more than we are now) with the same problems because one man's fair is not the same as the next's. Even when they are in agreement over an outcome. Hence why we need to meet in the middle at JUSTICE rather than swing out to FAIRNESS. Life is not fair and the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, true story.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

disneydude said:
There are a lot of things that I care about Navy. I could say that you are obsessed with gay marriage but I know that it isn't the only thing that you write about, just one of the most.

The reality is...I am concerned with fairness and justice for all of my fellow human beings. Whether they are gay/straight, male/female, black/white/asian/arab/latino/etc....
Until there is justice and equality for all, I will never be satisfied.
I believe strongly in the teaching "In as much as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethen....you have done it unto me".
Click to expand...


Your concerned unless the people happen to be Conservatives or in the military then all bets are off...........
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Navy Pride said:
Your concerned unless the people happen to be Conservatives or in the military then all bets are off...........
Click to expand...

You're concerned unless the people happen to be Conservatives or in the Military, then all bets are off.


Fix'd

Watch those Your/You're situations.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Navy Pride said:
Your concerned unless the people happen to be Conservatives or in the military then all bets are off...........
Click to expand...

I remember a talk once when I was in the Navy. A KKK rally was in the news, and some one commented that it pissed them off that we were defending the rights of those assholes. The reply, which was spot on, was that if you are defending the rights of anything less than everyone in the country, you where defending the rights of no one.

So yes, I am concerned even if it's conservatives, and very much if it is military personnel.
 
Re: Lots of people are legally excluded from marriage.

Redress said:
I remember a talk once when I was in the Navy. A KKK rally was in the news, and some one commented that it pissed them off that we were defending the rights of those assholes. The reply, which was spot on, was that if you are defending the rights of anything less than everyone in the country, you where defending the rights of no one.

So yes, I am concerned even if it's conservatives, and very much if it is military personnel.
Click to expand...

Right, Example: 1st Amendment doesn't protect the speech you like, it protects the speech you don't like. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom