• 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

CriticalThought said:
You are religious. You have made religious arguments in other threads.
Click to expand...

Do you have trouble reading what I said?

My religion has zero bearing on my stance against gay marriage.


To claim just because I am religious it must have bearing on my stance against gay marriage is another non factual based claim you are making.
 
CriticalThought said:
Why am I not allowed to make moral judgments? I've argued both sides of the same sex marriage debate, and the reason and evidence lies with the same sex marriage side, but you guys only care about your own little moral judgments. So I'll make one.

Polygamy is inherently degrading to society. Same sex marriage is not. Evidence and reason can tell you that much.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of people who don't agree with you..........
 
texmaster said:
Of course you can make moral judgments. But you just dont get the hypocrisy do you? You are arguing for gay marriage based on a moral not factual argument while belittling many who make the same moral argument against gay marriage.
Click to expand...

I'm sinking to your level. Now we can see eye to eye. :mrgreen:

Those are opinions not facts.
Click to expand...

Says you. I've provided countless pieces of evidence that same sex marriage is beneficial to society. You guys simply ignore it. So I'll just state it until you either address the evidence I've presented or you prove me wrong, but we both know you will do neither.

Unless you are prepared to provide factual evidence that polygamy is degrading to a society just for starters you'd best retract your moral statement.
Click to expand...

You never provide factual evidence that same sex marriage is degrading to society. Why should I have to when you never do? But I found this to be a pretty good argument about polygamy...

Rassales said:
Actually, polygamy/polyandry are inherently destabilizing in a society with roughly equal numbers of men and women. Marriage has salutary effects on poverty, the emotional and social stability of society, and the creation of families. We have very little to help us organize society around plural marriages and in those places where it's practiced, the situations are unstable.

In actual practice, plural marriages are only sociologically functional among the very wealthy and in societies where the number of men and women is seriously skewed by war, starvation, or other causes.
Click to expand...

...its about as good of evidence as you guys ever present to support your case.
 
texmaster said:
Do you have trouble reading what I said?

My religion has zero bearing on my stance against gay marriage.


To claim just because I am religious it must have bearing on my stance against gay marriage is another non factual based claim you are making.
Click to expand...

Bull. The first thing a religious person would want everyone to believe when it comes to a religious issue is that their religion has no bearing on what they believe. But feel free to make your non religious argument.
 
CriticalThought said:
I would like to find a non religious person just once who is against same sex marriage. And I don't mean someone who is against all civilly recognized marriage, but someone who is just against same sex marriage who has no religion.

View attachment 67109959
Click to expand...

I am not certain what you mean by "non-religious". I'll just provide answers that will probably catch all possible definitions.

I am fairly certain Hindu religion doesn't speak to homosexuality, yet the hindus I know are all against gay marriage.

While I believe in God, I have not been to church in 20 plus years - so, I am by no means religious. I don't believe gay marriage should be legal.

Lastly, someone I used to work with is an atheist. He isa republican, and is against gay marriage. I haven't seen him since he left he job, so I guess it's possible he's changed. But, based on conversations i've had with him, I doubt it.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
Bull. The first thing a religious person would want everyone to believe when it comes to a religious issue is that their religion has no bearing on what they believe. But feel free to make your non religious argument.
Click to expand...

You need to start accepting the fact that it is a moral issue and not necessarily a religions one for some.

As I have said before I was against it even before I was a Christian.

Many issues have no religious bearing on them for me like abortion. I think abortion should be a last resort and only used in cases on incest or rape. It has nothing to do with my religion at all. I assume this is true for others and other issues like gay marraige.
 
Last edited:
buck said:
I am fairly certain Hindu religion doesn't speak to homosexuality, yet the hindus I know are all against gay marriage.
Click to expand...

It depends on the type of Hinduism.

Homosexuality and Hinduism - ReligionFacts

While I believe in God, I have not been to church in 20 plus years - so, I am by no means religious. I don't believe gay marriage should be legal.
Click to expand...

You believe there shouldn't be same sex marriage why? I can't exactly determine whether you are against same sex marriage for a nonreligious reason if you don't provide your argument.

Lastly, someone I used to work with is an atheist. He isa republican, and is against gay marriage. I haven't seen him since he left he job, so I guess it's possible he's changed. But, based on conversations i've had with him, I doubt it.
Click to expand...

Yay for hearsay.
 
Last edited:
Blackdog said:
You need to start accepting the fact that it is a moral issue and not necessarily a religions one for some.

As I have said before I was against it even before I was a Christian.

Many issues have no religious bearing on them for me like abortion. I think abortion should be a last resort and only used in cases on incest or rape. It has nothing to do with my religion at all. I assume this is true for others and other issues like gay marraige.
Click to expand...

The only reason it is an issue is because religious people don't want homosexual relationships to be seen as legitimate. That is it.

Frankly, you were probably ambivalent towards it before you were Christian and you only now think you were against now that you are Christian.
 
Last edited:
Harshaw said:
Any arguments that it must lead to legalized pedophilia are easily dispensed with.

Polygamy, not so much.
Click to expand...

Actually, the polygamy argument is pretty easily dispensed with, too.
 
CriticalThought said:
Why am I not allowed to make moral judgments?
Click to expand...

Who ever said you couldn't?

I've argued both sides of the same sex marriage debate, and the reason and evidence lies with the same sex marriage side, but you guys only care about your own little moral judgments. So I'll make one.
Click to expand...

Why are we not allowed to make moral judgements?

Polygamy is inherently degrading to society.
Click to expand...

How so?
 
CriticalThought said:
The only reason it is an issue is because religious people don't want homosexual relationships to be seen as legitimate. That is it.
Click to expand...

Because mankind only derives it's morals from religion. :roll:

CriticalThought said:
Frankly, you were probably ambivalent towards it before you were Christian and you only now think you were against now that you are Christian.
Click to expand...

Frankly, not really.

I know my history better than you. I know my thoughts better than you.

So unless you have the ability to travel through time and read minds, your statement is garbage. It is an incorrect assumption.

So using logic we can honestly say your statement is crap.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
It depends on the type of Hinduism.
Click to expand...

I only know of hinduism, what I have been told by the couple of practicioners (immigrants from India) I have talked to. They clearly indicated that their "bible" does not make any reference to homosexuality. Yet, even though they somehow think Obama is doing a good job, they are against gay marriage becoming legal.

Yay for hearsay.
Click to expand...

I told you the truth about the atheist republican that was not in favor of gay marriage. Obviously, I have no proof to offer, so I'll just let you claim hearsay to anything that doesn't fit your view of what others are required to believe. I honestly only responded because I thought you were really curious to know if their were people that were against gay marriage, but were not religious. Obviously I was wrong.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
I'm sinking to your level. Now we can see eye to eye. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

You mean you got on a ladder and can finally see my face :)

Says you. I've provided countless pieces of evidence that same sex marriage is beneficial to society. You guys simply ignore it. So I'll just state it until you either address the evidence I've presented or you prove me wrong, but we both know you will do neither.
Click to expand...

Actually we have responded to your so called evidence. They use questionnaires and voluntary couples as evidence and there wasn't a single one of your so called studies that didn't say much more research was needed so I would re-evaluate your factual conclusion about the "benefits" of gay marriage.

You never provide factual evidence that same sex marriage is degrading to society. Why should I have to when you never do? But I found this to be a pretty good argument about polygamy...
Click to expand...

You have yet to prove its beneficial and you cannot answer the countless studies showing how poorly a child progresses under a single sex parent household.

...its about as good of evidence as you guys ever present to support your case.
Click to expand...

So you have no evidence supporting your bull**** claim about polygamy.

Got it.
 
Last edited:
CriticalThought said:
Bull. The first thing a religious person would want everyone to believe when it comes to a religious issue is that their religion has no bearing on what they believe. But feel free to make your non religious argument.
Click to expand...

Now you are just being flat dishonest. If a religious argument is never made, how can you claim religion plays a factor in the argument?
 
And what would be wrong with religious beliefs affecting votes in referendum or who we send to represent us?

I do have the right to practice my religion as I see fit, yes?
 
Charles Martel said:
And what would be wrong with religious beliefs affecting votes in referendum or who we send to represent us?

I do have the right to practice my religion as I see fit, yes?
Click to expand...

Absolutely, but only as long as it does not affect your morals I guess. :confused:
 
CriticalThought said:
Polygamy is inherently degrading to society.
Click to expand...
That's what people used to say about interracial marriage.

(I know the libbos were chomping at the bit to make this incredibly profound point, but I beat them to it.)
:rofl
 
Taylor said:
That's what people used to say about interracial marriage.

(I know the libbos were chomping at the bit to make this incredibly profound point, but I beat them to it.)
:rofl
Click to expand...

There is a difference. There was no logic behind interracial marriage causing problems for society. There is for polygamy.

(I know the cons where chomping at the bit to demonstrate this profound bit of logic, but I beat them to it).

:2razz:
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
There is a difference. There was no logic behind interracial marriage causing problems for society. There is for polygamy.
Click to expand...

What possible harm to society comes from a woman deciding to take two husbands?
 
Charles Martel said:
What possible harm to society comes from a woman deciding to take two husbands?
Click to expand...

I made a very good post a while back outlining the reasons that polygamy would NOT be beneficial to society in the same ways as gay marriage and why government would not sanction it. I'm searching for it.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I made a very good post a while back outlining the reasons that polygamy would NOT be beneficial to society in the same ways as gay marriage and why government would not sanction it. I'm searching for it.
Click to expand...

I hope it includes how your neighbor taking on another husband possibly affects your marriage. And..do you accept others may have a diferent logic on these matters?
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I made a very good post a while back outlining the reasons that polygamy would NOT be beneficial to society in the same ways as gay marriage and why government would not sanction it. I'm searching for it.
Click to expand...

So . . . you base this not on the idea of fundamental human rights to make whatever social associations they see fit, but on studies which purport to show whether or not such associations are beneficial to society?

New studies come along all the time which show old data to be faulty or at least in a different light. Anything you show might change. That's also true of "gay" marriage.

Do you expect that if a future study (and I mean a sound, scientific one) comes along to show that "gay" marriage is actually detrimental, then it would be abolished again? Or, if it hasn't been firmly established, that its proponents would care? Do you really think the APA stamp of approval matters? Did it matter when homosexuality was considered by science to be a disorder?

I guess the question is, is it a fundamental right or not? If it is, its "benefit" to society isn't particularly relevant.
 
Harshaw said:
So . . . you base this not on the idea of fundamental human rights to make whatever social associations they see fit, but on studies which purport to show whether or not such associations are beneficial to society?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I reject the concept of "natural rights".

New studies come along all the time which show old data to be faulty or at least in a different light. Anything you show might change. That's also true of "gay" marriage.
Click to expand...

This is true. That's why laws are changeable based on societal needs and knowledge that we gain. Our current laws reflect information that we have learned... not information we knew 200 years ago.

Do you expect that if a future study (and I mean a sound, scientific one) comes along to show that "gay" marriage is actually detrimental, then it would be abolished again? Or, if it hasn't been firmly established, that its proponents would care? Do you really think the APA stamp of approval matters? Did it matter when homosexuality was considered by science to be a disorder?
Click to expand...

If a future study came along and found that gay marriage is actually detrimental, I would think there would be many who would use this information to abolish it. Depending on the level of detriment, I would be on their side. Things need to be weighed in all areas. And yes, I think the APA stamp of approval matters.

I guess the question is, is it a fundamental right or not? If it is, its "benefit" to society isn't particularly relevant.
Click to expand...

As I said, I do not see anything as a fundamental right, which is why it's benefit to society is based on current knowledge, societal/individual needs, and is relevant based on what is discovered when the issue is studied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom