• 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!

Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?[W:237]

Are civil unions an acceptable compromise for SSM?

  • Yes, civil unions are an acceptable compromise.

    Votes: 17 17.2%

  • No, they are not, because:

    Votes: 51 51.5%

  • The government should not be involved with marriage, at all.

    Votes: 23 23.2%

  • Other (Please Explain)

    Votes: 8 8.1%
  • Total voters
    99
ChrisL said:
Again, I'm saying that if they want to married then they can be married. I don't support them making PC changes to things to do with marriage though. Clear yet?
Click to expand...

What PC things have gays asked to do with marriage?
 
ChrisL said:
If you can't understand by now, I give up.
Click to expand...

You haven't even started....how can you give up? Give ONE.....single......example. What are you so afraid that gay people would change?
 
ChrisL said:
Good Lord! Once again, I was using that as a hypothetical situation in my reasoning for choosing other in the poll options. It is something that came to my mind and would be a reason for me to support a union as opposed to a marriage in certain circumstances.
Click to expand...

But, you haven't even came up with a hypothetical situation that would have any effect on your marriage.

Changing the title on a government form really has no effect on how you refer to your spouse. And they didn't even change the terms on the application, just added "spouse" and you get to check which ever you want.
 
wolfsgirl said:
There are still people who don't believe in inter-faith, or interracial marriage, should we consider their feelings? There is no way for everyone to be treated equally by the law without upsetting some people.
Click to expand...

You see, now that is TRUE discrimination, so no. Of course some people are going to be upset by some things, and at the same time people can just leave well enough alone and get married and be happy. :shrug:

I get the feeling there are going to be some complaints and some conflicts coming along down the road.
 
wolfsgirl said:
But, you haven't even came up with a hypothetical situation that would have any effect on your marriage.

Changing the title on a government form really has no effect on how you refer to your spouse. And they didn't even change the terms on the application, just added "spouse" and you get to check which ever you want.
Click to expand...

I don't HAVE to come with a specific example. I can say that I would be against gay marriage if they wanted to change the concept of something to do with marriage that means something to other people. Just because you guys are demanding a specific example, doesn't mean I have to wrack my brain to come up with one. So no.

This is just my opinion anyways. I don't know why you guys let yourselves get sooo bent out of shape. :lol:
 
Ikari said:
Only if the government issues Civil Union licenses only (i.e. the Marriage License is done away with it total).
Click to expand...

exactly. then if a church wants to issue a "marriage decree" to certain couples they can.
 
ChrisL said:
You see, now that is TRUE discrimination, so no. Of course some people are going to be upset by some things, and at the same time people can just leave well enough alone and get married and be happy. :shrug:

I get the feeling there are going to be some complaints and some conflicts coming along down the road.
Click to expand...

Prohibiting inter-racial marriage or inter-faith marriage is TRUE discrimination, but prohibiting ssm is something less than true discrimination?

Sounds to me that you aren't really ok with gay marriage per se at all. Is sounds like you are very anti-gay marriage, but don't have a really good reason to give other than bigotry....and you don't want to come across that way, so its easier to engage in acrobats of claiming that are ok with it, as long as they don't change it, but you don't really know what they would change.
 
ChrisL said:
I don't HAVE to come with a specific example. I can say that I would be against gay marriage if they wanted to change the concept of something to do with marriage that means something to other people. Just because you guys are demanding a specific example, doesn't mean I have to wrack my brain to come up with one. So no.

This is just my opinion anyways. I don't know why you guys let yourselves get sooo bent out of shape. :lol:
Click to expand...

Just admit your bigotry and be done with it.
 
disneydude said:
Prohibiting inter-racial marriage or inter-faith marriage is TRUE discrimination, but prohibiting ssm is something less than true discrimination?

Sounds to me that you aren't really ok with gay marriage per se at all. Is sounds like you are very anti-gay marriage, but don't have a really good reason to give other than bigotry....and you don't want to come across that way, so its easier to engage in acrobats of claiming that are ok with it, as long as they don't change it, but you don't really know what they would change.
Click to expand...

You are free to think whatever you want of course.
 
ChrisL said:
You see, now that is TRUE discrimination, so no. Of course some people are going to be upset by some things, and at the same time people can just leave well enough alone and get married and be happy. :shrug:

I get the feeling there are going to be some complaints and some conflicts coming along down the road.
Click to expand...

So we DON'T have to please everyone to have true equality.

Just like I said, the changing of a govt form may make some people unhappy, but in the big picture it is much ado about nothing.
 
ChrisL said:
You are free to think whatever you want of course.
Click to expand...

All that we have gotten from you is this:

I'm ok with gay marriage and freedom....blah..blah..blah....unless they want to change something about marriage. I don't really know what they WOULD change and I'm not saying that they WOULD change anything....only that IF they wanted to change something....something that I can't give an example of...and don't really have to because its just my opinion.....but its not REALLY discrimination to prevent gays from marrying, not like real discrimination like preventing inter-racial or inter-faith marriage.....but I'm actually not against SSM....I just don't want them to change real marriage and I'm afraid that they might change it...even though I have no concrete reason to believe that they would....but IF they wanted to....thats good enough.
 
ChrisL said:
I don't HAVE to come with a specific example. I can say that I would be against gay marriage if they wanted to change the concept of something to do with marriage that means something to other people. Just because you guys are demanding a specific example, doesn't mean I have to wrack my brain to come up with one. So no.

This is just my opinion anyways. I don't know why you guys let yourselves get sooo bent out of shape. :lol:
Click to expand...

The point is, there is no one concept of marriage. My neighbor may have a completely different concept of marriage than I do, but it has no effect on MY concept of marriage. Just like MY concept of marriage has no effect on YOUR concept of marriage.

I'm having a backyard wedding, with no religious stuff at all. Some may say that you have to get married in a church. I don't have to.
The government form has nothing to do with anyones personal concept of marriage. Other than having to sign the thing there are no requirements.
 
ChrisL said:
You calling me a bigot is not debating.
Click to expand...

I'm pointing out your hypocrisy....I didn't call you a bigot. I indicated that you inability to point to a single example of this fictious claim that you have invented is perhaps an indication that you aren't really being honest about your true feelings.

What I was saying is that IF you were a bigot then you should just come out and say it rather than jumping through hoops.....or at least attempt to come up with something to back your argument on.
 
Last edited:
disneydude said:
All that we have gotten from you is this:

I'm ok with gay marriage and freedom....blah..blah..blah....unless they want to change something about marriage. I don't really know what they WOULD change and I'm not saying that they WOULD change anything....only that IF they wanted to change something....something that I can't give an example of...and don't really have to because its just my opinion.....but its not REALLY discrimination to prevent gays from marrying, not like real discrimination like preventing inter-racial or inter-faith marriage.....but I'm actually not against SSM....I just don't want them to change real marriage and I'm afraid that they might change it...even though I have no concrete reason to believe that they would....but IF they wanted to....thats good enough.
Click to expand...

Nope, I said I support gay marriage as long as they don't want to change anything about marriage. Period. The examples about discrimination were no less discrimination than preventing gay people from being married. The point was not allowing them to change things about existing marriage customs is not being discriminatory IMO, especially if there is a civil union option available for those that might be unhappy about something with marriage.
 
ChrisL said:
Nope, I said I support gay marriage as long as they don't want to change anything about marriage. Period. The examples about discrimination were no less discrimination than preventing gay people from being married. The point was not allowing them to change things about existing marriage customs is not being discriminatory IMO, especially if there is a civil union option available for those that might be unhappy about something with marriage.
Click to expand...

What do you base this on? What evidence do you have that gays want to change ANYTHING? It sounds like an irrational fear that you have. Its called building a strawman and then attacking it because there is no legitimate argument that you can attack.
 
disneydude said:
I'm pointing out your hypocrisy....I didn't call you a bigot. I indicated that you inability to point to a single example of this fictious claim that you have invented is perhaps an indication that you aren't really being honest about your true feelings.
Click to expand...

Oh really? This is your post right here.

Just admit your bigotry and be done with it.
Click to expand...

Hmm. For some reason this makes me feel as if you are accusing me of bigotry. As if you know me or something.
Click to expand...
What I was saying is that IF you were a bigot then you should just come out and say it rather than jumping through hoops.....or at least attempt to come up with something to back your argument on.[/QUOTE]

I've backed up my argument. If you don't like how I did it or what I said, that's not my problem. Just because I don't point to a specific example (because nothing gay marriage is relatively new so nothing has happened yet) doesn't make my argument invalid. Just because I try to look at the bigger picture and try to see unintended consequences doesn't make me a "bigot" either.

Edit: I screwed up the quotes and I can't fix it. :lol:
 
Last edited:
RepublicanMcDuc said:
No, because it's still the government relegating homosexual persons to second-class status. Whether you use the word marriage or union isn't as important as using the same word for both straight and gay couples.
Click to expand...


The civil union will contain the same benefits as a heterosexual marriage
Click to expand...

how is this relegating anyone to second class status?

gay couples get A, B and C, called civil union
straight couples get A, B and C, called marriage

the ONLY difference is what you call it. so apparently the word "marriage" is what is most important.
 
disneydude said:
What do you base this on? What evidence do you have that gays want to change ANYTHING? It sounds like an irrational fear that you have. Its called building a strawman and then attacking it because there is no legitimate argument that you can attack.
Click to expand...

That is just not true. I answered the OP question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom