• 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!

Do you support legalizing gay marriage?[W:667]

Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Navy, the only way that poll would have delivered interesting results would have been if it was evenly split or majority in favor. As I am not bothering to do it, I won't find out if it is interesting, but I highly doubt it.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

That's nice, completely irrelevant though.

Actually, it's completely relevant and sinks your argument on procreation.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Why you people feel the need to proclaim that homosexuals reproduce, with the opposite sex, is just strange. We know that. That's how the species survives, reproduction. Homosexuality is not part of that equation.

And reproduction is not a requirement for marriage. Makes your connection of the two invalid.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Perhaps I didn't word it well enough. Heterosexual sex is essential to the continuation of the species. Doesn't mean all people must reproduce, but a significant number must to continue the species. Homosexual sex? Could disappear tomorrow forever, would not hurt the species at all, it would go on without missing a beat. So, are they the same? Certainly not. Is a homsexual union the same as a heterosexual marriage? Again, no.

Ah. So you don't know the difference between sexual orientation and sexual behavior. What you say above has nothing to do with sexual orientation and uniting in marriage, It has to do with sexual behavior. Glad I could clear that up for you.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?



Typical liberal logic: “if it doesn't agree with me it's biased, irrelevant, hateful, bigoted, mean, exploitive, ignorant, narrow-minded, unintelligent, retarded, hitlerian, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, masochistic, chauvinistic, maniacal, evil, depraved, smelly, fat, unhealthy, unhelpful, insensitive, individualistic, horrible, detestable, vile, odious, terrible, unbearable, intolerable, insufferable, revolting, repulsive, disgusting, sickening, ghastly, filthy, sordid, horrible, nauseating, repellent, prejudiced, unfair, partial, nasty, atrocious, ghastly, dreadful, shocking…

It’s never, “Oh, somebody has a view different from mine? I wonder what it might be? Perhaps I should inquire of this fine, obviously-intelligent individual exactly what his opinion is and understand the subject as he see it and perhaps even engage in some civilized conversation that may bring us both closer to some objective truth?”

But that’ll never happen ‘cause all Libs know how to do is destroy anything that does not mimic them.

And you, sir! You call yourself “civilized”?

Nothing could be further from the truth!


:mrgreen:

Typical conservative logic. "I know you completely destroyed my argument with logic and facts, but I'll stay with my massacred position because to give it up would cause more cognitive dissonance than I could handle."

See, Baron, I don't care if someone has a different position than I. They'd just better be prepared to defend it with logic and facts. That didn't happen in this thread. Of course, Of course, YOU seem to not care about those silly things like logic and facts... if those things rip your argument to shreds. Perhaps if you did, you might have agreed with my thrashing of the OP... but NO! COGNITIVE DISSONANCE!
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Yes. That's why we have lots of laws like "you can't take your clothes and make someone's eyes bleed" and "you can't have wild monkey sex with a real wild monkey". It's disgusting. Lots of people don't want you doing that shyte in their neighborhood. Or state. Or country.

In your opinion. The majority of folks in this country do not believe it is disgusting. That means that your opinion will eventually get trumped.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Nowhere did I post that marriage is only for children, as I said. Twisting the facts, misleading, and out right lies. I'm all too familiar with the left's tactics.

Ah, labeling, a sign that a poster doesn't have an argument. You strongly argued that the notion of children is central to marriage. Do you believe that or do you not? I cited three of your posts suggesting you do.

Now tell me, what is your view on people who will not or cannot have children? Since you have three times argued that children are central to marriage, should people who are unwilling or infertile still be allowed to get married?
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Here is the McClatchy-Marist Poll from just a few days ago (8/14).

WASHINGTON: Sea change: Americans revising opinions on gays, poll finds | Washington | McClatchy DC

54% support SSM in this poll... again, the percentage has been rising consistently over the past 10 years. One thing of note is that those 60 and older are the one age group that doesn't support SSM... so when they die off...

Another very interesting poll.

Push that debauchery, CC. All it shows is what percentage of Americans are Biblically-challenged heathens.

Regular people don't need to know how other folks perform sex acts.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Regular people don't need to know how other folks perform sex acts.

"Regular" people don't care what two consenting adults do regarding sex, marriage, or relationship status.

It's only the pompously religious that seem to care. They're the ones who want to force their beliefs on others.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

The rhetorical and logical hoops through which SSM opponents will happily hurl themselves through in order to justify their abject bigotry are laughable.
 
Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Push that debauchery, CC. All it shows is what percentage of Americans are Biblically-challenged heathens.

Regular people don't need to know how other folks perform sex acts.

I, for one, could not care less about your imaginary friend or his book.

I have not read a single anti-SSM argument that isn't riddled with logical fallacies.
 
Last edited:
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

To address your post matchlight.

First of all, the argument when it comes to equal protection will always come from the state's reasoning behind the restriction in the law related to a state interest of some kind, whether it comes from the state or the other side. When it comes to same sex restrictions on marriage, the "reasons" so far have been "procreation", "voters want it", and "tradition", basically. Procreation would be the strongest argument of all of these if it could either be shown that a) some state actually restricted marriage due to a couple not being able to procreate with each other (which none do) or b) that same sex couples getting married (not just being together) actually negatively affected procreation levels, but this simply isn't true. And no one can prove that a child needs a mother and a father to be raised well. There is no "ideal" when it comes to childrearing. These reasons don't hold up to rational review, let alone intermediate scrutiny, as sex/gender restrictions should be placed.

When it comes to relatives (first), the reasons are much more sound even if still a little shaky. The reasons are genetic issues with close relatives and undue influence in the relationship when the two are raised together. These are not just a small chance when we are talking siblings or parent/child, but rather a 40% chance of having genetic issues, something that can be proven. The other one is another thing we have other laws or rules against when it comes to other people. People are supposed to develop an aversion to relationships with their close relatives. If this doesn't develop naturally with someone a person is raised with, then there is reason to suspect some undue influence, grooming, in the relationship. Not to mention, relatives already have many of the rights that same sex couples are seeking, since the point of marriage is to establish a legal relationship that doesn't already exist. That is what legal marriage does for every single couple who gets married. In all honesty, I don't really care if same sex relatives get the right to marry or even if opposite sex relatives get the right to marry, but there are sound legal reasons against them, unlike with same sex marriage.

As for multiple spouses, there are reasonable concerns when it comes to the logistics for the government and stress that it would put on the government to recognize additional spouses for potentially every person. Where do you limit number of spouses? Theoretically, with no limit, every person in the US could be legally married to every other person in the US and even the world, and the government would have to recognize those people as spouses. Even with only a few people married to each other, it would be a legal nightmare. We limit a person to only being allowed one person as their named legal medical decision maker, and that is something that comes automatically with marriage so long as no other legal paperwork exists naming someone else. It would cost the government money in immigration and benefits for military. It would lead to problems in family and divorce court for deciding everything from alimony and asset division, to who gets what custody/time/child support of the children.

The state interest is not taken from "should it be allowed", but rather "why should it be restricted". You continually fail to recognize this.

The reason people do not have a constitutional right to engage in certain acts is due to the states' reasoning behind the restrictions on those acts. Once challenged, the state can present its case for why such laws should be in place. In most of those things, the state has at least a reasonable argument, even if it is somewhat weak for some. It doesn't have to be a great argument. When it comes to same sex marriage restrictions, the state has no legitimate argument.

We all know now that the 14th applied the US Constitution to the states as well. Just because the Constitution didn't originally apply at least in full, to the states, doesn't mean it doesn't currently due so, when it comes to rights guarantees to individuals. Like it or not, states lost power. But the Constitution still guaranteed rights to the citizens even if they shared them with the states from the beginning. The change made with the 14th tipped the power more towards individuals, as it should be. Many states have more people now than the entire country did in its first few decades of existence. It is pointless to have limited the power of the federal government to avoid having a tyranny of the majority, only to allow these smaller tyrannies of the majorities to exist as states.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Yeah, I wonder what percentage of children are born through normal means vs. artificial? I'm going to guess about 99.9999999%. I may be off by a digit. The remainder is not enough to populate a small village, let alone the human race. It's ridiculous to even think artificial means could replace nature's method.

You'd be very wrong.

More women using IVF than ever before - CNN.com

In 2012, more than 3.95 million babies were born, the Centers for Disease Control reports (PDF). That's below what demographers call the "replacement level," the level at which the generation can replace itself. Of those births, IVF treatments account for about 1.5% of all babies born in the United States that year.

That doesn't even account for using sperm donation (since not all those require IVF) or using another person (which might be rare, but does happen).

The point is though, if necessary, as in if everyone suddenly became gay, we still know how to make babies through other means. So this means that heterosexual sex is not necessary for the continuation of our species.

"Replacement level" is an artificial thing for us now because in reality, we don't need to constantly be procreating for our species to survive. It would take til 2300 for us to get down to just 1 billion people at a fertility rate of 1.5. That is at least 200 years of existence at a pretty low fertility rate.

World population may actually start declining, not exploding.

Here in reality though, heterosexual sex isn't going away anyway. It is still around and will be for a long time. So add that to the other methods we have for making babies, and we are fine as a species.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

You can call it a marriage, but it's not. It's different, not the same as a marriage.

In your opinion.

This is a subjective statement and has to do with your personal definition of personal marriage, not legal marriage.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

That applies to you as well, now doesn't it? Marriage is just for children? Not sure where I proclaimed that.

No. Legal marriage is a specific thing in the law. Your argument is based off of your opinion of what you believe it should be, not what it actually is. Legal marriage is the only way to establish the legal relationship of "spouse" between two people. This legal relationship then has other rights and responsibilities, along with benefits and privileges that come with it. There is nothing about a person's sex/gender that prevents them from being able to take on the responsibilities of being a person's spouse who happens to be of the same gender.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

You can call it a marriage, but it's not. It's different, not the same as a marriage.

What's different?

Do they not pay bills?
Do they not have a mortgage or car insurance?
Do they get a free roof instead of having to pay for it?
Do they not have to cook, clean, eat, wash dishes, clean clothes?
Do they not watch tv?
Do they never argue about finances, or who's going to run the vacuum cleaner?

What's different?
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

We limit a person to only being allowed one person as their named legal medical decision maker,...

Do we? With a single spouse marriage that becomes obvious, but your statement, while you probably intended it to, does not limit itself to married individuals alone. How does medical decision work for a single adult child who's not designated one parent over the other and both disagree as to what is to happen, under the assumption of the adult being incapable of making that decision? Assume for the purpose of the question that the adult child never thought to get a medical PoA.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Difference of opinion is ok (altho hey...what do you personally think of racist's opinions?) but it's the attempt to force such bigotry on others and deprive them of civil rights that most object to.

The bigots are deprived of nothing. Being offended is not protected at all.

To me that's about where the conversation about SSM should end. I've tried to come up with something I lose as a married straight person if the gay couple down the street from me gets married, and I'm at a loss. Marriage presumably increases their happiness, and encourages long term commitment, fidelity, and stability which are clear social or societal goods. And same sex couples obtaining those benefits does not require me to lose any of them - there is an infinite supply

I suppose most people strongly opposed to SSM and who favor laws against homosexual conduct also believe that being gay is a "choice" but there is just no evidence that's true, and there is certainly strong evidence that efforts to change sexual orientation fail all but a tiny sliver of even for the most strongly motivated individuals. So it's not as if proponents of anti-gay policies can rationally expect those policies will reduce the number of gay individuals, even if that was a legitimate goal. The evidence tells us those policies will have almost no effect, and do quite a bit of damage to those who cannot and will not change into straight people.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

What's different?

Do they not pay bills?
Do they not have a mortgage or car insurance?
Do they get a free roof instead of having to pay for it?
Do they not have to cook, clean, eat, wash dishes, clean clothes?
Do they not watch tv?
Do they never argue about finances, or who's going to run the vacuum cleaner?

What's different?

And, increasingly, gay couples have children....
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

And, increasingly, gay couples have children....

Maybe the children of gays are robots that do all the cooking, cleaning, working, and bill paying for the HOMO's ?????????? ;)
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

And what percentage of those voters were over 40? Furthermore, that was back in 2005.

Recent pollings already show you've lost:



That's from April 2014.

Poll shows more Texans support same-sex marriage than oppose it - Lone Star Q

Again, put up for a vote in Nov. as a state constitutional amendment proposition.

If the people of Texas vote it's OK to support depravity, I'll never say another word on the subject.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Maybe the children of gays are robots that do all the cooking, cleaning, working, and bill paying for the HOMO's ?????????? ;)

I would get an infraction if I used that term.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

Do we? With a single spouse marriage that becomes obvious, but your statement, while you probably intended it to, does not limit itself to married individuals alone. How does medical decision work for a single adult child who's not designated one parent over the other and both disagree as to what is to happen, under the assumption of the adult being incapable of making that decision? Assume for the purpose of the question that the adult child never thought to get a medical PoA.

We limit how many people they can name on a legal medical power of attorney or how many they can have legally recognized at once.

Living Wills, Health Care Proxies, & Advance Health Care Directives | Section of Real Property, Trust and Estate Law

Now, when it comes to blood relations or other legal relationships that we don't choose, then there can legally be more than one person with that right, but it is more of a default thing rather than something being chosen by the person who might need those decisions made for them in the future. But these are due to inherent nature of the relationship to begin with. Marriages on the other hand are not something that happen because someone else chooses it for us. We don't choose our parents. And our parents have a right to both have a say for us, until we are able to and do decide to take it upon ourselves to choose someone else to do it for us.
 
Re: Do you support legalizing gay marriage?

If you had religion you would know that is a BS statement. Spare me your condescension.

No, it isn't a "BS statement", whether you have religion or not. Right and wrong are subjective. The very fact that there are so many different religions is evidence to this.
 
Back
Top Bottom