What will the status of Gay marriage be in the USA in 2050

Dooble said:

Holy S***! Liberals still don't know the difference between skin tone and behavior!

Sorry, 50 years of STD's and bong resin have caused them permanent brain damage!

Click to expand...

Being in an interracial relationship is about behavior not skin tone. Being prevented from being in an interracial relationship is about discrimination, as is being prevented from being in a same sex relationship.

I would love to see marriage equality in every state; and while I hope to see it done sooner than by 50 years from now, I think barring another major SCOTUS decision on the issue, we'll see gay marriage legal in all, if not nearly all states by then. I know Michigan has made a huge turnaround when it comes to public opinion, and we've got a court case coming up and probably a referendum waiting in the wings either next year or in 2016. We may be the next, or near next, state to make it so.

The status of Queer Marriages in 2050 will be determined by the outcome of the battle between Logical and Moral reasoning versus Liberal PC Queer & Immoral fantasy.

roguenuke said:

Being in an interracial relationship is about behavior not skin tone. Being prevented from being in an interracial relationship is about discrimination, as is being prevented from being in a same sex relationship.

Click to expand...

Being prevented from being in an interracial relationship is about DISCRIMINATION. And, accepted as such by the overwhelming, if not statistically, TOTAL opinion of the people of America......exception being a MINORITY of people recognized as being RACISTS.

Being prevented from being in a same sex relationship, in the opinion of the MAJORITY of America, is being against IMMORAL, UNNATURAL behaviour and is considered a PERVERSION.

Thus, including the term "DISCRIMINATION" with respect to "SAME SEX" relationship as being one with "INTERRACIAL" relationships is a fantasy attempt by the Queers or Gays, and their enablers the Liberals & Bleeding Hearts.

Of course, if one enlarges the meaning of the term "DISCRIMINATION" to mean "DIFFERENTIATION" as one would, essentially, "DIFFERENTIATE" any fingerprint, nose, book, etc., from another......then Roguenuke's opinion can be accepted as valid.

HoongLoong said:

Being prevented from being in an interracial relationship is about DISCRIMINATION. And, accepted as such by the overwhelming, if not statistically, TOTAL opinion of the people of America......exception being a MINORITY of people recognized as being RACISTS.

Being prevented from being in a same sex relationship, in the opinion of the MAJORITY of America, is being against IMMORAL, UNNATURAL behaviour and is considered a PERVERSION.

Thus, including the term "DISCRIMINATION" with respect to "SAME SEX" relationship as being one with "INTERRACIAL" relationships is a fantasy attempt by the Queers or Gays, and their enablers the Liberals & Bleeding Hearts.

Of course, if one enlarges the meaning of the term "DISCRIMINATION" to mean "DIFFERENTIATION" as one would, essentially, "DIFFERENTIATE" any fingerprint, nose, book, etc., from another......then Roguenuke's opinion can be accepted as valid.

Click to expand...

his opinion is 100% valid and when the issue has been pushed state supreme court justices agree with him
you opinion however is not valid.

also just to show how inane your broken logic is the exact same thing could be said about interracial relationships, the super vast "MAJORITY" of americans were against it when it past and they thought it was "IMMORAL, UNNATURAL" behavior and is considered a "PERVERSION".

What happened? It was ruled discrimination just like now

yes NOW people are ok with interracial marriage but at the time they were against it, as a matter of fact 80+% were against it, and it wasnt until 1995(which is disgusting and pathetic it took that long) that the majority were ok with it.
right now 46-58% are ok with equal rights for gays depending on the wording of the question.

SOrry your logic fails and using your logic against you yours is the only one not valid proven by stats, facts and history

HoongLoong said:

The status of Queer Marriages in 2050 will be determined by the outcome of the battle between Logical and Moral reasoning versus Liberal PC Queer & Immoral fantasy.

Click to expand...

Nothing moral or logical about banning same-sex marriages.

By then homophobes will be as stigmatized as racists are now.

Cardinal said:

I'm putting $20 on Utah being the last holdout. I've known a lot of Mormons and their resistance to gay marriage regardless of age has been really quite extraordinary. I think those guys may mean business.

Click to expand...

I actually think the LDS Church and its adherents are more amenable to this sort of social change than a lot of Evangelical denominations. I wouldn't be surprised if Utah ends up allowing gay marriage legislation to pass through before Mississippi or equivalent states. People underestimate changing youth demographics among Mormons and the proclivity for adapting to social change that the Church has routinely shown. Even now the Church as an organization has begun to quietly shift its resources away from fighting gay marriage and pointedly did not sever its ties with the BSA and did so rather smoothly unlike a whole host of Baptist and Evangelical associations which have cut ties.

Oh look, another thread about gay marriage. Haven't seen one of those in a while.

Guys, we do NOT need a separate forum for this.... we DO, however, need one for the Trayvon Martin case.

That makes sense. Yes.

As to the status of the oxymoronic "SS marriage" by the year 2050, it is likely that there will be few if any SS civil union domestic partnerships of any name.

This is because by 2050 the birth defect that is the sole cause of homosexuality will likely have been prevented for at least 30 years, resulting in few homosexuals left to be in such CUDPs.

Ontologuy said:

As to the status of the oxymoronic "SS marriage" by the year 2050, it is likely that there will be few if any SS civil union domestic partnerships of any name.

This is because by 2050 the birth defect that is the sole cause of homosexuality will likely have been prevented for at least 30 years, resulting in few homosexuals left to be in such CUDPs.

Click to expand...

No. Chances are by 2050 the diseased portions of the planet will be ruled by the Chinese, who never were infected by the monotheism virus..........................

Ontologuy said:

As to the status of the oxymoronic "SS marriage" by the year 2050, it is likely that there will be few if any SS civil union domestic partnerships of any name.

This is because by 2050 the birth defect that is the sole cause of homosexuality will likely have been prevented for at least 30 years, resulting in few homosexuals left to be in such CUDPs.

Click to expand...

Wanna put your money where your mouth is?

shrubnose said:

• 2Something in the middle like civil unions everywhere

• 3. Gay marriage will be illegal

[*]1. Gay marriages will be treated just like Heterosexual Marriages
[/LIST]

Click to expand...

equal rights will be achieved, discrimination will be defeated and we will be looking at pictures like these

laughing at how stupid the bigots and morons were

Lakryte said:

Wanna put your money where your mouth is?

Click to expand...

Though no one can predict the future with 100% accuracy, not even God, an appeal to the relevant fact-based truths can often lead to predictions that are quite stunning: http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-and-sexuality/160480-homosexuality-birth-defect.html#post1061800678.

AGENT J said:

equal rights will be achieved, discrimination will be defeated and we will be looking at pictures like these
View attachment 67150156
laughing at how stupid the bigots and morons were

Click to expand...

Has anyone else ever noticed how both those against interracial marriage and those against same sex marriage both look angry? You don't really see such anger on the other sides, from those fighting for equal rights. But there always appears to be anger and hostility and animosity coming from the anti-whatever marriage sides.

Ontologuy said:

Though no one can predict the future with 100% accuracy, not even God, an appeal to the relevant fact-based truths can often lead to predictions that are quite stunning: http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-and-sexuality/160480-homosexuality-birth-defect.html#post1061800678.

Click to expand...

It isn't a "birth defect", it is no more likely to disappear in 30-40 years than those who like the color green, and it isn't going to die out, since it has existed since the beginning of humans.

roguenuke said:

It isn't a "birth defect", it is no more likely to disappear in 30-40 years than those who like the color green, and it isn't going to die out, since it has existed since the beginning of humans.

Click to expand...

Your first three phrases are absolutely false .. and notice how I linked to current state-of-the-art science that presented my accurate point that homosexuality is a birth defect, and you just denied that reality with "nuh uh, no it's not!" without referencing one single scientific presentation to justify your point.

As to your last phrase, that homosexuality has existed since the beginning of humans, you simply and ludicrously cannot know that.

However, homosexuality has indeed existed for thousands of years, just like spina bifida and cleft palate, two other birth defects with epigenetic etiology .. and the incidence of these two birth defects has been greatly reduced by supplementing the pregnant woman with mere vitamins.

Now I completely understand your personal and political reasons for preferring reality denial on this topic.

But, if respect for the truth means anything to you, acceptance is really for the best.

Ontologuy said:

Your first three phrases are absolutely false .. and notice how I linked to current state-of-the-art science that presented my accurate point that homosexuality is a birth defect, and you just denied that reality with "nuh uh, no it's not!" without referencing one single scientific presentation to justify your point.

As to your last phrase, that homosexuality has existed since the beginning of humans, you simply and ludicrously cannot know that.

However, homosexuality has indeed existed for thousands of years, just like spina bifida and cleft palate, two other birth defects with epigenetic etiology .. and the incidence of these two birth defects has been greatly reduced by supplementing the pregnant woman with mere vitamins.

Now I completely understand your personal and political reasons for preferring reality denial on this topic.

But, if respect for the truth means anything to you, acceptance is really for the best.

Click to expand...

You were refuted in the very thread you linked. No need to go into it again. It is not a birth defect. You cannot show any legitimate evidence that it is. And it will not "go away" within the next 3 to 4 decades. Believing that is just plain ignorance.

roguenuke said:

You were refuted in the very thread you linked.

Click to expand...

False, obviously.

No one "refuted" via scientific reference to the contrary the valid scientific presentation that homosexuality is a birth defect, no one.

A number of people whined, as they couldn't handled the "startling" revelation that homosexuality is a birth defect, but that's all.

No "refuting" occurred, whatsoever.

Why just a quick read of that thread makes it crystal clear not only that homosexuality is a birth defect, but that no one "refuted" that reality at all .. they merely whined.

roguenuke said:

No need to go into it again.

Click to expand...

Absolutely -- as it was scientifically presented that homosexuality is a birth defect, and thus whining about it any further is futile.

roguenuke said:

It is not a birth defect.

Click to expand...

"It is not, it is not, it is not!"

:roll:

Yet the whining just keeps on coming ...

roguenuke said:

You cannot show any legitimate evidence that it is.

Click to expand...

:yawn:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-and-sexuality/160480-homosexuality-birth-defect.html#post1061800678

roguenuke said:

And it will not "go away" within the next 3 to 4 decades.

Click to expand...

Again, blatant reality denial from Roguenuke.

Now that it has been scientifically presented that homosexuality is a birth defect, research scientists dedicated to the prevention of birth defects will soon find a prevention for the birth defect of homosexuality, because the epigenetic etiology of it is similar to that of spina bifida which scientists have greatly prevented simply by giving the pregnant woman specific vitamins.

Truly, it's only a matter of time.

roguenuke said:

Believing that is just plain ignorance.

Click to expand...

And your projection here is reminiscent of those who once refused to believe the scientific presentations that Earth is eliptically round not flat and that it revolves around the Sun not vice versa. :lol:

If you wish to rehash the debate about the scientific reality that homosexuality is a birth defect, that's your call ..

.. But the scientifically presented reality that homosexuality is an epigenetically inculcated birth defect is germane to this thread, as the reality of it and the likely prevention of it in the next five years or so speaks directly to the question posed in this thread.

Ontologuy said:

Though no one can predict the future with 100% accuracy, not even God, an appeal to the relevant fact-based truths can often lead to predictions that are quite stunning: http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-and-sexuality/160480-homosexuality-birth-defect.html#post1061800678.

Click to expand...

Bigotry is a birth defect. Appealing to another post of yours, although humurous, is not a fact-based truth. Find a site where you can bet real money, and I'll link up with you. I will bet you $10,000 that you will be wrong.

Lakryte said:

Bigotry is a birth defect.

Click to expand...

Meaningless and erroneous, irrelevant snipe -- a manifestation of denial about the reality that homosexuality is a birth defect.

Lakryte said:

Appealing to another post of yours, although humurous, is not a fact-based truth.

Click to expand...

Again, absolutely false.

In the post I referenced, I had presented scientific links that attest to the epigenetic etiology of homosexuality, and that clearly show that homosexuality is, in reality, a birth defect.

That you attempt to falsely demean with "another post of yours" and "humorous" is simply another manfestation of your denial.

Until you or someone else can link to current science, as I did in that post, current science that instead says that homosexuality is caused by something else, you have nothing but your denial of what is now an obvious reality: the epigenetic etiology of the birth defect of homosexuality.

Lakryte said:

Find a site where you can bet real money, and I'll link up with you. I will bet you $10,000 that you will be wrong.

Click to expand...

Meaningless extremist hyperbole.

Current scientific presentation remains that homosexuality is a birth defect, no matter what communication form your denial takes.

To answer the question posed in the OP:

Gay marriage will be treated the same as heterosexual marriage.

Further, all those now opposed to it, having grown up and gotten with the times, will not admit they were opposed to the idea in 2013.

Analogously to the way that, magically, no one alive ever hated Martin Luther King.

Ontologuy said:

Meaningless and erroneous, irrelevant snipe -- a manifestation of denial about the reality that homosexuality is a birth defect.

Click to expand...

Homosexuality is not a birth defect any more than blackness is.

Again, absolutely false.

In the post I referenced, I had presented scientific links that attest to the epigenetic etiology of homosexuality, and that clearly show that homosexuality is, in reality, a birth defect.

That you attempt to falsely demean with "another post of yours" and "humorous" is simply another manfestation of your denial.

Until you or someone else can link to current science, as I did in that post, current science that instead says that homosexuality is caused by something else, you have nothing but your denial of what is now an obvious reality: the epigenetic etiology of the birth defect of homosexuality.

Click to expand...

Your pseudo science was refuted in that topic. There is nothing defective about being homosexual, which is why the vast majority of scientists disagree with you.

Meaningless extremist hyperbole.

Current scientific presentation remains that homosexuality is a birth defect, no matter what communication form your denial takes.

Click to expand...

Nope. Homosexuality is not viewed as a birth defect. You just made that up and point to debunked pseudo-science.

Lakryte said:

Homosexuality is not a birth defect any more than blackness is. Your pseudo science was refuted in that topic. There is nothing defective about being homosexual, which is why the vast majority of scientists disagree with you. Nope. Homosexuality is not viewed as a birth defect. You just made that up and point to debunked pseudo-science.

Click to expand...

Here you simply make a number of obviously false ideology-based reality denial statements that a quick review of the both the OP -- http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-and-sexuality/160480-homosexuality-birth-defect.html#post1061800678 -- and the other posts I made in the thread validate.

Whining "no it's not, no it's not, no it's not!" will simply not make the birth defect reality of homosexuality go away.

Acceptance is really for the best.