• 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!

Maryland Gay Marriage Bill sent back to cmte. Shelved for this year at least.

mac said:
That's not how it works, you have to present a compelling case to the supreme court or vote in people that will make your laws.

It does actually, since marriage is defined as between a man and a woman. No law is being applied unequally.
Click to expand...

It depends on where you get your definition.
 
mac said:
Why? It's already not allowed...I'm not trying to change anything.



Well, if there were a right for homosexuals to marry, and it was being denied you, then you're rights would be violated. Since SSM is not a right, you're rights are not being violated.
Click to expand...

Many percieve marriage as a right. As such it should apply to everyone equally. SSM = Same sex MARRIAGE. Note the word "marriage" in SSM? By makeing the distinction of SSM being different than heterosexual marriage then you have to give valid reasons as to why the two are different. And those valid reasons must be compelling reasons as to keep SSM seperate from heterosexual marriage. Being of the same gender is NOT a valid reason as that is sexual discrimination...which IS against the law.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Many percieve marriage as a right. As such it should apply to everyone equally. SSM = Same sex MARRIAGE. Note the word "marriage" in SSM? By makeing the distinction of SSM being different than heterosexual marriage then you have to give valid reasons as to why the two are different. And those valid reasons must be compelling reasons as to keep SSM seperate from heterosexual marriage. Being of the same gender is NOT a valid reason as that is sexual discrimination...which IS against the law.
Click to expand...

What's the M mean again?
 
Your Star said:
We have, yet you have yet to provide a compelling case to keep said law. You can't hide the fact that your position isn't based in logic by saying this.
Click to expand...

Really, so it's now legal? Why are we having this discussion then?

And we are saying that having marriage as only one man, and one woman is a violation of equal protection, no new rights are created.
Click to expand...

Well, you are wrong.
 
mac said:
What's the M mean again?
Click to expand...

Our constitution/bill of rights is based on specific morals chosen by the authors. None of these morals includes Christian ideas of "sex" or the Christian idea of "marriage" The constitution enables citizens to define words however they want provided that they do not threaten the morals of freedom, equality and probably some other than don't include Christian 'sex' and 'marriage'.
 
mac said:
What that says is Congress can't make a state religion or ban a religion from being practiced.
Click to expand...

By keeping gay marriage illegal, some people lose their ability to freely practice their religion.

Just because gay marriage is against the rules in your religion doesn't mean it is against the rules in all religions.
 
theplaydrive said:
Our constitution/bill of rights is based on specific morals chosen by the authors. None of these morals includes Christian ideas of "sex" or the Christian idea of "marriage" The constitution enables citizens to define words however they want provided that they do not threaten the morals of freedom, equality and probably some other than don't include Christian 'sex' and 'marriage'.
Click to expand...

Correction....provides states and citizens that right. Most states define marriage as between a man and a woman.
 
Tucker Case said:
By keeping gay marriage illegal, some people lose their ability to freely practice their religion.
Click to expand...

Is animal sacrifice and polygamy allowed for reasons of religious freedom?

Just because gay marriage is against the rules in your religion doesn't mean it is against the rules in all religions.
Click to expand...

M'kay. What religion embraces SSM?
 
mac said:
Is animal sacrifice and polygamy allowed for reasons of religious freedom?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, did we change the subject to animal sacrifice and polygamy? Are some people allowed to do this while others are not?


Seems like that instead of addressing the point, you've created a red herring argument.

M'kay. What religion embraces SSM?
Click to expand...

Unitarian Universalism to name one. Reform Judaism to name another.
 
mac said:
Correction....provides states and citizens that right. Most states define marriage as between a man and a woman.
Click to expand...

And defining marriage as between a man and a woman is inherently unconstitutional because it denies people equal protection under the law.
 
Tucker Case said:
I'm sorry, did we change the subject to animal sacrifice and polygamy? Are some people allowed to do this while others are not?

Seems like that instead of addressing the point, you've created a red herring argument.
Click to expand...

Not in the least...you tried going the denial of religious freedom route. No red herring.
 
theplaydrive said:
And defining marriage as between a man and a woman is inherently unconstitutional because it denies people equal protection under the law.
Click to expand...

I've developped a copromise definition of "Marriage is a lifelong bond between one man and one woman. Any relationship that doesn't fit this bill, such as same sex unions or unions involving one or more divorced persons, will be called a civil union", but it always seem to get rejected by people on both sides of the debate.
 
Tucker Case said:
I've developped a copromise definition of "Marriage is a lifelong bond between one man and one woman. Any relationship that doesn't fit this bill, such as same sex unions or unions involving one or more divorced persons, will be called a civil union", but it always seem to get rejected by people on both sides of the debate.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't accept that definition.
 
mac said:
Not in the least...you tried going the denial of religious freedom route. No red herring.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about marriage, which is allowed for heterosexual couples (animal sacrifice and polygamy are not allowed for anyone). Thus, disallowing SSM violates religious freedom in ways that dissallowing animal sacrifice and polygamy do not.

That's why it is a red herring.
 
Tucker Case said:
I've developped a copromise definition of "Marriage is a lifelong bond between one man and one woman. Any relationship that doesn't fit this bill, such as same sex unions or unions involving one or more divorced persons, will be called a civil union", but it always seem to get rejected by people on both sides of the debate.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hear lifelong isn't popular with many heterosexuals who value the sanctity of marriage.
 
Tucker Case said:
I know, but neitehr would most anti-gay marriage people (due to so many of them being divorced themselves), which is why it acts as a perfect compromise. :lol:
Click to expand...

It pisses everyone off, nice ;)

Though it will create a holier than thou group of people who never got divorced, and are straight, that could be extremely annoying.
 
Your Star said:
It pisses everyone off, nice ;)

Though it will create a holier than thou group of people who never got divorced, and are straight, that could be extremely annoying.
Click to expand...

That would be horrible.
 
Tucker Case said:
I know, but neitehr would most anti-gay marriage people (due to so many of them being divorced themselves), which is why it acts as a perfect compromise. :lol:
Click to expand...

It would if it were sincere, rather than just a ploy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom