• 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 Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill

This whole gay marriage thing is nothing but a farce dreamed up by a few militant gays and a bunch of "Feel Good" liberals......There is and openly gay guy on our golf team and a good friend of mine..(He is also our best golfer)....Sadly he lost his partner to AIDS recently.I even went to the funeral........He says he and most of his gay friends would be perfectly happy with civil unions with equal right...(that is exactly what I advocate) He wishes that the activists would just shut up about gay marriage because it is hurting the cause in that it is hurting the movement for civil unions because it turning off straight people who might be sympathetic to their cause of civil unions............

I totally agree with him because it is even starting to turn me off...........
 
Last edited:
Blackdog said:
The Constitution is built on the concept of "rule of the people," or society--that each person has the right to affect the laws. Please point out how this is reflected in the Bible? Or how this is influenced by the Bible?

You mite want to check out this reading list as well...

Classical Influences on US Constitution

Any more questions?
Click to expand...

one. if we are discussing "influences on the Constitution", would it be fair to consider the beliefs of the Founding Fathers themselves as to the nature of that Constitution?

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. -John Adams

Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. - George Washington

"A Bible and a newspaper in every house, a good school in every district -
all studied and appreciated as they merit - are the principle support of virtue, morality, and civil liberty." - Benjamin Franklin

and so forth. the founding fathers themselves were fully familiar and comfortable with public faith (if not public sects; which they were against at the federal level).
 
Taylor said:
None of this predates the bible. Do I need to give you a history lesson, or do you google?
Click to expand...

Yes all of it does, are you that ignorant or just playing stupid? Everything in history is a chain of events. One leading to the next. The basic concepts of property etc that we have today started in Babylon.

Now I have posted proof that the Constitution has pretty much nothing to do with the Bible.

If you can show otherwise (and I know you can't) please do.
 
cpwill said:
one. if we are discussing "influences on the Constitution", would it be fair to consider the beliefs of the Founding Fathers themselves as to the nature of that Constitution?

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. -John Adams

Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. - George Washington

"A Bible and a newspaper in every house, a good school in every district -
all studied and appreciated as they merit - are the principle support of virtue, morality, and civil liberty." - Benjamin Franklin

and so forth. the founding fathers themselves were fully familiar and comfortable with public faith (if not public sects; which they were against at the federal level).
Click to expand...

Oh please, don't even try that tired old crap around here. People can go quote for quote saying the exact opposite.

Here let me show you...

"Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."- John Adams,

"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion” - George Washington

"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." - Benjamin Franklin

Please use the search function. :roll:
 
Navy Pride said:
This whole gay marriage thing is nothing but a farce dreamed up by a few militant gays and a bunch of "Feel Good" liberals......There is and openly gay guy on our golf team and a good friend of mine..(He is also our best golfer)....Sadly he lost his partner to AIDS recently.I even went to the funeral........He says he and most of his gay friends would be perfectly happy with civil unions with equal right...(that is exactly what I advocate) He wishes that the activists would just shut up about gay marriage because it is hurting the cause in that it is hurting the movement for civil unions because it turning off straight people who might be sympathetic to their cause of civil unions............

I totally agree with him because it is even starting to turn me off...........
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. Why didn't you just say this in the first place?
 
Taylor said:
Actually, that's not true.

You claimed earlier that "there is no correlation between children of same sex couple being more likely to become gay" - there indeed has been some work that disputes that. See for example: Stacey, J. & Biblarz, T.J. (2001). (How) does the sexual orientation of parents matter? American Sociological Review, 66, 159-183.
http://www.soc.iastate.edu/soc522a/PDF readings/Stacey.pdf

These are pro-gay marriage authors who (in reviewing existing research) conclude that evidence exists for at least a small positive correlation between parental sexual orientation and that of their children.

Other researchers have also pointed to articles that claim "no difference" in their abstracts, but apparent differences in the data.
Click to expand...

Actually, what I said is true. I've read the study that you posted several times in the past because it often gets thrown at me. It does NOT say what you seem to be claiming it says, but let's try this: you tell me what you think the study proves.
 
Taylor said:
You're confusing me with someone else.
Click to expand...

"It certainly can be. We have lots of laws that discriminate based on gender." - Taylor

Yes someone is confused, but it is not me. :2wave:
 
Navy Pride said:
Yes, I think we are going round and round in circles here because I know that a child growing up with a father and mother is more successful then on with 2 fathers or 2 mothers...I know you guys on the left don't like "Its common sense" but it really is my friend.........A mother provides certain qualities that a father can not and vice versa and to argue that is not so is just ridiculous.....If a child did not do better with a father and a mother then God would have not set it up that way.............

.If this country only had gay people in it then it would be doomed because no children would ever be born..........A mother and a father is the natural way......
Click to expand...

We're going to go round and round on this, NP, and you won't see me back off. What you call "common sense" gets trumped by facts and statistics. Long ago, "common sense" was that the earth was flat. Facts proved this inaccurate. Same concept as here.
 
Navy Pride said:
This whole gay marriage thing is nothing but a farce dreamed up by a few militant gays and a bunch of "Feel Good" liberals......There is and openly gay guy on our golf team and a good friend of mine..(He is also our best golfer)....Sadly he lost his partner to AIDS recently.I even went to the funeral........He says he and most of his gay friends would be perfectly happy with civil unions with equal right...(that is exactly what I advocate) He wishes that the activists would just shut up about gay marriage because it is hurting the cause in that it is hurting the movement for civil unions because it turning off straight people who might be sympathetic to their cause of civil unions............

I totally agree with him because it is even starting to turn me off...........
Click to expand...

It's interesting, NP. I agree 100% with this post... and have been professing this position for years. I just see your position on this as inconsistent with also believing that children in a single sex household can do as well as those in an opposite sex household.

No matter, though. See? Ultimately, we are on the same side, here.
 
Blackdog said:
Yes all of it does, are you that ignorant or just playing stupid? Everything in history is a chain of events. One leading to the next. The basic concepts of property etc that we have today started in Babylon.
Click to expand...
Oh I see. There's a historical chain of events for Babylon but not for the Bible.

At least this answers my question regarding whether you are being disingenuous or hopelessley naive. It is the latter.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Actually, what I said is true. I've read the study that you posted several times in the past because it often gets thrown at me. It does NOT say what you seem to be claiming it says, but let's try this: you tell me what you think the study proves.
Click to expand...
The study conflict with your earlier assertion. Tell me why you think it does not.
 
Taylor said:
The study conflict with your earlier assertion. Tell me why you think it does not.
Click to expand...

Are you going to play THIS game, again? No, I asked you for clarification. I read the study and have before. I want to know what you think it means. You said it conflicts with my earlier assertion. Please clarify this. Without that information, there is no argument.
 
Blackdog said:
I absolutely agree. Why didn't you just say this in the first place?
Click to expand...

Why don't gays say that in the first place, instead of letting the fringe radicals speaking for them?
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
images-ItsATrap-Preview.png




A point of theory Tucker and I had a while back....

If marriage is about raising children, then any couple raising children should have access to it (per the 14th amendment), and couples without children should not. This would be regardless of the couple's composition; be it gays, related, mixed race, existing marital status, etc.

I would like to point out that NJ was trying to change the purpose and definition of marriage away from the raising of children and to just any couple for the sake of that couple remaining intact.

Absent children, the state has no compelling interest in your relationships. NJ came 6 votes away from putting Big-Bro in your bedroom when Big-Bro did not have a compelling interest to do so.

***
When gays argue for marriage due to the children they rais, yet would not afford those same rights to other couples also raising children, they trip my trap. Their hyperbole can not repel logic of this magnitude!! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I figured it was a trap. One thing to note. I have expanded my position somewhat from just a children's standpoint to an entire family's standpoint. You do make an interesting theory, though.
 
Blackdog said:
"It certainly can be. We have lots of laws that discriminate based on gender." - Taylor

Yes someone is confused, but it is not me. :2wave:
Click to expand...
You were trying to poke fun at someone for piss-poor spelling.
Blackdog said:
That is not "allot" of gender discrimination laws. You said it, not me.
Click to expand...
Again, you must have the wrong person.
 
Navy Pride said:
This whole gay marriage thing is nothing but a farce dreamed up by a few militant gays and a bunch of "Feel Good" liberals......There is and openly gay guy on our golf team and a good friend of mine..(He is also our best golfer)....Sadly he lost his partner to AIDS recently.I even went to the funeral........He says he and most of his gay friends would be perfectly happy with civil unions with equal right...(that is exactly what I advocate) He wishes that the activists would just shut up about gay marriage because it is hurting the cause in that it is hurting the movement for civil unions because it turning off straight people who might be sympathetic to their cause of civil unions............

I totally agree with him because it is even starting to turn me off...........
Click to expand...


You can take your second rate "civil unions" and shove it. Gay people should not have to take the scraps that you or anyone else wants to throw to them.
Why is it that people like you feel that you are entitled to more than any other person has the right to...and Why do you think that you have the right to say that anyone should be happy with an inferior classification just because you don't feel that you are willing to share your word.
Gays shouldn't ever sink to the level where they will accept their "massa's" crumbs and be grateful because of the "generosity"....puh....lease!
 
Navy Pride said:
Please don't try and change the subject, you do it all the time when your losing the debate.............thanks...........
Click to expand...

Nice dodge...Navy. I think we all know the answer...because you are definitey a "Cafeteria Catholic".
 
Taylor said:
You were trying to poke fun at someone for piss-poor spelling.
Click to expand...

Are you on drugs or something?

I have not poked fun at anyones spelling because I am piss poor at it myself.

You said this...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...eats-gay-marriage-bill-74.html#post1058475420

To which I replied "Really? Like what?" to which you have tried to use mothers getting custody most of the time (not even a law) and registering for the draft.

So you have given me much of nothing.

Taylor said:
Again, you must have the wrong person.
Click to expand...

The link does not lie. :roll:
 
Last edited:
CaptainCourtesy said:
We're going to go round and round on this, NP, and you won't see me back off. What you call "common sense" gets trumped by facts and statistics. Long ago, "common sense" was that the earth was flat. Facts proved this inaccurate. Same concept as here.
Click to expand...

So are you saying all things equal that you as a man could make a better mother for a child then the actual mother who gave birth to the child?
 
Taylor said:
Oh I see. There's a historical chain of events for Babylon but not for the Bible.
Click to expand...

Not concerning the Constitution no. There was no Bible for the first 350 years of Christianity! The first official list of Scriptures was done in 393 at the Council of Hippo, then again in Carthage in 397 and 419. The Church did not infallibly define these books until the Council of Trent, when it was called into question by the Reformers, in 1556.

The Bible had very little to do with our Constitution. It had some influence as it is or was at the time the main religion. The founders went out of their way to make certain the government was secular, and could not be influenced or condone any religion at all.

Taylor said:
At least this answers my question regarding whether you are being disingenuous or hopelessley naive. It is the latter.
Click to expand...

Yes it does, that you like to dodge the meat of a post and go off into the land of irrelevancy.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I figured it was a trap. One thing to note. I have expanded my position somewhat from just a children's standpoint to an entire family's standpoint. You do make an interesting theory, though.
Click to expand...

Your instincts saw it, but I wasn't as obvious this time.

I must be getting better ;) :mrgreen:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
It's interesting, NP. I agree 100% with this post... and have been professing this position for years. I just see your position on this as inconsistent with also believing that children in a single sex household can do as well as those in an opposite sex household.

No matter, though. See? Ultimately, we are on the same side, here.
Click to expand...

All things being equal my friend they just can't..........sure there might be a gay couple raising a child well and a straight couple screwing up royally but like I said all things equal the child is better of with a mother and a father.............
 
Navy Pride said:
So are you saying all things equal that you as a man could make a better mother for a child then the actual mother who gave birth to the child?
Click to expand...

Better? No, I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that in a two parent household two males or two females produce children as well adjusted as a two opposite sex household. If the emotional/social support is there in a two parent household, the sex of the two parents does not matter. The is demonstrated to me both through research and through personal observation.
 
Jerry said:
Your instincts saw it, but I wasn't as obvious this time.

I must be getting better ;) :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

We haven't posted on the same threads too often, lately. I guess I've gotten rusty. ;):mrgreen:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom