• 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!

DC City Council votes to legalize gay marriage

j-mac said:
I am not making it complicated. A vote was taken. The people voted it down, and the council overruled the people no? That is not what is supposed to happen in our system is it?


j-mac
Click to expand...

I have a problem with counsels overruling the result a measure put to a vote.
 
Jerry said:
I have a problem with counsels overruling the result a measure put to a vote.
Click to expand...


I do too. Clearly we are moving in this country toward marginalizing the voter.

When that happens watch out!


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
I am not making it complicated. A vote was taken. The people voted it down, and the council overruled the people no? That is not what is supposed to happen in our system is it?


j-mac
Click to expand...

If you are referring to the DC case when was their a vote? If you are referring to the CA situation who knows what will happen eventually? Maybe the same thing that happened in the Loving vs Virginia case where 70% nation supported anti miscegenation laws.
 
winston53660 said:
"We The People" also includes homosexual citizens who define theme selves as married.
Click to expand...

Homosexual citizens often make a career out of defining themselves, most couldn't care less. Define yourself all you'd like, define marriage in your own light unti your heart is content....and everyone else will as well. And if you don't like the consensus.....:2wave:
 
Taylor said:
No that is not true.
Click to expand...

No, it is absolutely true. The Constitution superceded mob rule even if that mob rule is forced by vote.

Yes it does.
Click to expand...

No, it does not. Perhaps you would like to demonstrate how it does but I don't have high hopes for your success in doing so.

That your statement "mob rule voting away the rights of others" is completely irrelevant, thanks for making my point.
Click to expand...

:roll::roll::roll:

Might I suggest a crash course in civics? Then you would make such asinine and idiotic statements with puffed up bravado as if you just accomplished something.
 
Charles Martel said:
Homosexual citizens often make a career out of defining themselves, most couldn't care less. Define yourself all you'd like, define marriage in your own light unti your heart is content....and everyone else will as well. And if you don't like the consensus.....:2wave:
Click to expand...

Yes, if we don't like the consensus, we work to get that changed. Deal with it.
 
winston53660 said:
If you are referring to the DC case when was their a vote?
Click to expand...


No, and that is the point. Shouldn't there be one?


Maybe the same thing that happened in the Loving vs Virginia case where 70% nation supported anti miscegenation laws.
Click to expand...


This has nothing to do with race. homosexuals are not a race of people.

j-mac
 
winston53660 said:
If you are referring to the DC case when was their a vote? If you are referring to the CA situation who knows what will happen eventually? Maybe the same thing that happened in the Loving vs Virginia case where 70% nation supported anti miscegenation laws.
Click to expand...

There was no vote. NO vote whatsoever.

DC is a very liberal city. I see the people in this city supporting gay marriage.
 
j-mac said:
No, and that is the point. Shouldn't there be one?
Click to expand...

I really don't think rights issues should be put to a vote.





This has nothing to do with race. homosexuals are not a race of people.

j-mac
Click to expand...


It is an example of a rights issue.
 
winston53660 said:
I really don't think rights issues should be put to a vote.
Click to expand...

And Constitutionally, they aren't supposed to be put to a vote. That's why anti-gm advocates try their hardest to ridiculously assert that it isn't a rights issue.
 
Ok, let me clear something up before I get labeled here. I personally don't care if homosexuals get married. My wife is a graphic designer, that has worked among many gay people, and two of our closest friends back in Maryland were gay, and committed to each other for some 20 years, and raised a beautiful hetro daughter.

But what we are talking about here is the process, by which it becomes acceptable to society, and therefore, law of the land. I think that the homosexual community is doing itself a great disservice by forcing this issue down the throat of those too closed minded to see what the real questions are.

Visitation, Last will rights, benefits in the workplace, all valid concerns for the committed gay couple. However, letting their concerns get hijacked by the loudmouths in their movement is hurting them.


j-mac
 
aps said:
There was no vote. NO vote whatsoever.

DC is a very liberal city. I see the people in this city supporting gay marriage.
Click to expand...

Also a city high in minority numbers, so, why would you see support? For example, in California, black men voted 70% against same sex marriage, 75% of black women voted against same sex marriage. Those are whopping numbers, this op has an opinion on why.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/29/opinion/29blow.html

As well, Hispanic populations will become the dominant minority if they haven't already and many who are fiercly Catholic oppose same sex marriage as was the case in NY.

New York: Defeat on Same-Sex 'Marriage' Bill - Catholic Online

However, those anticipations were dashed by a coalition of eight Democrats led by Sen. Ruben Diaz, Sr. (D-NY 32), the leader of the Senate fight against same-sex "marriage," who joined every member of the GOP caucus in a conscience vote against the bill.

Debate began after a short noon recess with Sen. Duane arguing that this "legislation would provide me and tens of thousands of other New Yorkers equal rights in New York State."

Delivering the final speech before the vote, Duane appeared confident of victory and pressed fellow Senators to vote for the bill since, "It's always the time to be on the right side of history!"

Only Sen. Diaz spoke on the floor of the Senate against same-sex "marriage." The Senator and Evangelical minister, indefatigable in his fight against same-sex "marriage," rallied 20,000 Hispanics over the summer in support of natural marriage, forged a broad religious coalition to oppose the bill, and even sacrificed with his wife a cruise celebrating their wedding anniversary in order to attend a special legislative session called by Gov. Paterson, where same-sex "marriage" could have been called to a vote.

Diaz mentioned that adherents of the world's major religions - not just Evangelicals - oppose same-sex "marriage," including Jews, Muslims, and Catholics. Diaz specifically praised those Catholic bishops who signed the Manhattan Declaration as a testament of their opposition to same-sex "marriage."

He proposed that the Senate instead should let New Yorkers decide on same-sex "marriage" through a referendum.
Click to expand...

I don't believe these findings can support your assertation that DC would support same sex marriage. Highly transient, much of the population minority, I think it goes down in flames.
 
jallman said:
Yes, if we don't like the consensus, we work to get that changed. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

We are dealing with it. IN California, in New York, hopefully by referendum in DC, the answer in referendum by a 31-0 record is a resounding and overwhelming no.

Remember, after the elections, it's not those opposed to ssm that are harboring hate. We hear about "lies and deceit", the radical or religious right and their agenda, 1000 or more excuses are used. When in reality, the vast number of persons in the US and even state by state oppose same sex marriage. Deal with that.:cool:
 
Last edited:
CaptainCourtesy said:
I placed in bold the important part and the reason why either GM or gay civil marriage should be legalized.
Click to expand...
It's the part I've always thought was important. Whether or not gay marriage (recognized by the state) makes for a better society is what's at the heart of the debate.
 
j-mac said:
But what we are talking about here is the process, by which it becomes acceptable to society, and therefore, law of the land. I think that the homosexual community is doing itself a great disservice by forcing this issue down the throat of those too closed minded to see what the real questions are.

j-mac
Click to expand...

There is always going to be closed minded people just like in the Loving vs Virginia case where 70% were opposed to interracial marriage.
 
winston53660 said:
There is always going to be closed minded people just like in the Loving vs Virginia case where 70% were opposed to interracial marriage.
Click to expand...

However, blacks who certainly would align with interracial marriage, oppose same sex marriage. Probably believe skin color/ethnicity and behavior aren't good analogies. Imagine those who fought so hard for civil rights and the right to marry another of different ethnicity opposing same sex marriage so strongly. I wonder why?
 
Charles Martel said:
However, blacks who certainly would align with interracial marriage, oppose same sex marriage. Probably believe skin color/ethnicity and behavior aren't good analogies. Imagine those who fought so hard for civil rights and the right to marry another of different ethnicity opposing same sex marriage so strongly. I wonder why?
Click to expand...

Because they are closed minded possibly?
 
molten_dragon said:
Please provide some proof for this ridiculous claim.
Click to expand...
Compare relative strengths of cultures that promote monogamy vs cultures that promote polygamy and you'll have your answer.
 
Charles Martel said:
We are dealing with it. IN California, in New York, hopefully by referendum in DC, the answer in referendum by a 31-0 record is a resounding and overwhelming no.

Remember, after the elections, it's not those opposed to ssm that are harboring hate. We hear about "lies and deceit", the radical or religious right and their agenda, 1000 or more excuses are used. When in reality, the vast number of persons in the US and even state by state oppose same sex marriage. Deal with that.:cool:
Click to expand...

We are dealing with it. Every time ignorant jackasses try to enforce their morality over our rights, they will find another fight elsewhere. And we will work through the courts, through community action, through law suit after law suit, through ballot measures...everything.

And eventually, ignorant jackholes will lose the will to fight and their money will dry up because the fanaticism behind this drive to deny equality will burn out and fade.

But the human tendancy toward freedom and liberty does not fade. We have momentum on our side. And they have...well...nothing really except an empty ache to make others subjugates of a failing morality.
 
jallman said:
We are dealing with it. Every time ignorant jackasses try to enforce their morality over our rights, they will find another fight elsewhere. And we will work through the courts, through community action, through law suit after law suit, through ballot measures...everything.
Click to expand...


Why are 'ballot measures' the last thing you come to in affecting change in the law of the land? Shouldn't that be the first?


And eventually, ignorant jackholes will lose the will to fight and their money will dry up because the fanaticism behind this drive to deny equality will burn out and fade.
Click to expand...


Is anyone that doesn't agree with a specific agenda like that found in the homosexual community, just an 'ignorant jackhole'?


But the human tendancy toward freedom and liberty does not fade. We have momentum on our side. And they have...well...nothing really except an empty ache to make others subjugates of a failing morality.
Click to expand...


What are the 'failings' endemic in society currently that you see as the downfall of those opposed to SSM?


j-mac
 
Taylor said:
Compare relative strengths of cultures that promote monogamy vs cultures that promote polygamy and you'll have your answer.
Click to expand...


However, monogamy doesn't preclude SSM does it?


j-mac
 
Charles Martel said:
Also a city high in minority numbers, so, why would you see support? For example, in California, black men voted 70% against same sex marriage, 75% of black women voted against same sex marriage. Those are whopping numbers, this op has an opinion on why.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/29/opinion/29blow.html

As well, Hispanic populations will become the dominant minority if they haven't already and many who are fiercly Catholic oppose same sex marriage as was the case in NY.

New York: Defeat on Same-Sex 'Marriage' Bill - Catholic Online



I don't believe these findings can support your assertation that DC would support same sex marriage. Highly transient, much of the population minority, I think it goes down in flames.
Click to expand...

I am smiling because after I wrote that, I thought about the fact that I remember minorities in California rejecting it. About 10 minutes ago, I sent an e-mail to a friend of mine who is very active in the gay community in this area (I work in DC) and asked him what he thought would happen if they allowed the citizens to vote on this issue. I think you may be right, but I am interested in what my friend says. I'll report back here. :2wave:
 
Charles Martel said:
However, blacks who certainly would align with interracial marriage, oppose same sex marriage. Probably believe skin color/ethnicity and behavior aren't good analogies. Imagine those who fought so hard for civil rights and the right to marry another of different ethnicity opposing same sex marriage so strongly. I wonder why?
Click to expand...

That's a false analogy. Sexual orientation is not a "behavior". It's a hard-wired personality trait. Homosexuals have no choice in the matter.

skin color / sexual orientation are analogous. A person does not have a 'choice' in the matter.

Blacks in CA opposed Prop 8 because of a last-minute push by their religious leaders. The Sunday before that election, many large congregations got an earful of Biblical misinterpretations. Hispanics in Catholics churches got the same thing.

Since that election many have realized they made a mistake. If Prop 8 were to be voted on again next November, it would not pass.
 
Last edited:
jallman said:
We are dealing with it. Every time ignorant jackasses try to enforce their morality over our rights,
Click to expand...
What rights are those mean, ignorant jackasses trying to take away?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom