• 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!

On a scale of 1 to 10 how important is gay marriage?

On a scale of 1 to 10 how important is gay marriage?


  • Total voters
    47
I gave it a 2 because I remembered a statistic somewhere saying 15% op population is gay (not claiming this its true just thought i remembered reading it, can't be bothered tolook it up) so rounded up and got 2. Personally I have no problems with SSM but I think there are far far more important things to deal with that affect far far more people.
 
I think some of the people who chose 1 are of this mind, but I think there is a significant amount of them that would go out of their way in order to show up to vote against gay marriage. That wold be standing in the way.

I think some people like to pretend they don't care about the issue when in fact they care very much about the issue. They just confuse adamant opposition to gay marriage with not thinking the issue is important. In order to adamantly oppose something, you have to think it's fairly important.


Tucker I absolutely agree with you well said...there are so many people and some I know personally that dont have the fortitude to say im against gay marriage...they think they are supposed to or they are intimidated into saying they dont care or they are for it in public...
Its much harder to be truthful and upfront about your "TRUE" feelings on the issue...online..because it winds up a group hump on the person...what I find quite interesting that none of the sarcasm and name calling EVER happens in real life when the conversation arises and I tell the truth that im against gay marriage...I know the reason for that however :) I will always be upfront and honest about my position
 
I think some of the people who chose 1 are of this mind, but I think there is a significant amount of them that would go out of their way in order to show up to vote against gay marriage. That wold be standing in the way.

I think some people like to pretend they don't care about the issue when in fact they care very much about the issue. They just confuse adamant opposition to gay marriage with not thinking the issue is important. In order to adamantly oppose something, you have to think it's fairly important.

Well, I don't oppose it because it doesn't affect me in any way. To me, deciding on whether I want gin or rum for breakfast is a more pressing issue. Today, I chose gin and cranberry. It's like the Sahara in my mouth, and I love it.
 
1, non-issue being blown well out of proportion. If gays want to be together, who gives a flying ****?

Not me.

Now, do gays do flying ****s, or just regular ones? Just how much do you really know about gay sex?
 
Well, I don't oppose it because it doesn't affect me in any way. To me, deciding on whether I want gin or rum for breakfast is a more pressing issue. Today, I chose gin and cranberry. It's like the Sahara in my mouth, and I love it.

Oh, I believed you when you said it earlier. I didn't mean to give the impression that I didn't believe you.

I was just making an observation based on the implication that everyone that chose 1 wouldn't' stand in the way of gay marriage, when that's not the case since I know that a significant amount of the one votes actually would stand in the way of gay marriage if given the opportunity to do so by way of a vote. Many of them would alter their normal behavior in order to do so and take very active anti-gay marriage stances, which also indicates that they care more about the issue than they are letting on (Jerry argues against gay marriage a lot, but he's consistent in his argument that it's because he doesn't care enough to support it and he would need to be convinced in order to supporting it).
 
I'm gay, and I give the issue a 1. Comparing it to other issues, I think it ranks last. I believe people should be able to do just about whatever they choose to do- however, marraige, whether gay or straight, has no meaning to me because I believe it has become a failed institution. As a gay man who is having a civil union ceremony on June 2nd, I want no part of this "marraige" thing. The chances of my relationship surviving are much better if we don't get married, statistically.

These types of issues are more about government intrusion these days (the intrusion of the federal government into state, local, and personal affairs) than it is about equality and justice. Frankly, it would rate higher on my list if it were a state or local issue, but I think the federal government should just leave it be.
 
Oh, I believed you when you said it earlier. I didn't mean to give the impression that I didn't believe you.

I was just making an observation based on the implication that everyone that chose 1 wouldn't' stand in the way of gay marriage, when that's not the case since I know that a significant amount of the one votes actually would stand in the way of gay marriage if given the opportunity to do so by way of a vote. Many of them would alter their normal behavior in order to do so and take very active anti-gay marriage stances, which also indicates that they care more about the issue than they are letting on (Jerry argues against gay marriage a lot, but he's consistent in his argument that it's because he doesn't care enough to support it and he would need to be convinced in order to supporting it).

Oh. I think it's better for them to do this on their own. I mean, it's not a pressing issue like oppression, segregation, and outright mass hatred boiling over into a huge series of violent events. If it were, I'd be protesting with them, but in this case they got it. Obama is already on their side, what more do they need?
 
I view it as a sin, but I neither block nor support it because America isn't a theocracy.

Maybe it's more important than we realize.
 
this is an aside, but I thought Obama opposed gay marriage? Did he change his stance on that?

As far as I know his opinion is still "evolving"
 
To most homosexuals, the issue is a 10. I'm not a homosexual, but I am a citizen who strongly believes that until every segment of our society is treated equally, our society can not be totally free. So for me personally, it's an 8-9.

In the 21st century, there is no excuse for the USA, a country supposedly built upon personal freedom, to still have a segment of our population that can be legally, and institutionally, discriminated against.
 
It's not a very large issue at all, I'd rate it at 1 compared to the other issues and problems facing the Republic. Quite honestly, I don't see why we get hung up on it so much. Let same sex couples marry and let's move on to more important issues.
 
Right wing partisan joke of the day: Well, at least we know it isn't intelligent design when it comes to Obama.

Actually, he did oppose gay marriage at one point, and later say that his position on the subject was "evolving".
 
Important in regards to what? It's not a make or break deal for me. I would be happy voting for an anti-SSM candidate if I thought their actions would help the country.
 
Your question is pretty vague. Politically? Personally? Comparatively? For example, for me, politically, it would probably be about a 9. Personally, because I am not gay, it would be about a 4. Comparatively, when I consider all other issues that are concerning, it would be about a 7.
How important is it for news coverage. In other words, if you were working in the media with lots of other news to cover like the economy, the election, foreign policy, etc.
Oh, that's a COMPLETELY different question. Seems like you are asking how much news coverage should GM get COMPARED to other things, such as economy, the election, foreign policy, etc. Is that correct?
Yes, that's what I meant. A news organization has to make choices every day on what stories are most important -- what page of the newspaper it goes on if it's print, how much air time it gets if it's TV, etc.
OK. Thanks for clarifying. All things being equal, especially if there is a court case or a ballot or legislative decision going on, compared to other issues, when it comes to the news media, I'd put it at a 5 or a 6. Certainly the economy, election, and certain foreign issues should have more coverage, but in regards to domestic issues, it should rank pretty high.


SO this question has many dynamics so I qouted the conversation above because I feel practically idential to CC.

Now on to the other topic:

would I vote for someone that didnt support SSM? YES

would I vote for someone against SSM? if they had pros that out weighed this con yes

Would I vote for someone against SSM and campaigned on it and wanted to make laws making it harder? HELL ****ING NO because they would have proved they have no clue what "america" is about and I could support a someone like that.
 
It is important but I think feeding and sheltering our homeless and taking proper care of orphans is a much bigger issue... to name just a couple.
 
It is important but I think feeding and sheltering our homeless and taking proper care of orphans is a much bigger issue... to name just a couple.

Married gay couples could help with the orphan problem.
 
It would go against most of what I would do ordinarily, but if a party platform officially puts it on their plank, I would consider their seriousness on the matter. If they were serious and were more than likely to introduce it when the political capital was higher, I would probably vote for that party based on that.
 
As far as the world goes it is not all that important. If you are homosexual it ranks much higher but still is not earth shattering. I think the entire topic is asinine as same sex marriage is really easy and should have been legal always. Fighting over this when people are starving seems so silly.
 
It's a fluff issue only meant serious by those that are against it. I give it a 1.
 
Yeah, he announced that he opposes DOMA, and that he won't support any federal defense of DOMA.

Opposing DOMA isn't the same thing as supporting gay marriage, though. The problem with DOMA from a conservative perspective is that it is an usurpation of state authority by the federal government. IF a state decides to allow gay marriage, the federal government should recognize the marriage as well.
 
Back
Top Bottom