• 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!

Is being anti-same sex marriage Pro-Family?

Does being anti-same sex marriage make one Pro-Family?

  • Yes it does (state your reasons in the thread)

    Votes: 3 7.0%

  • No it doesn't (state you reasons in the thread)

    Votes: 40 93.0%
  • Total voters
    43
Bob Blaylock said:
Are you under the impression that I approve any more of the high rates of divorce and illegitimacy than I do of homosexuality?

These are all part of the very same evil, all leading to the very same set of social ills. You are right, of course, that a major part of the problem is a failure to teach proper moral values to our younger generations. The acceptance of homosexuality and other forms of sexual immorality and perversion are also symptoms of this same failure.

We have devolved into a dysfunctional society where immorality is treated as equal to morality, indecency as equal to decency, evil as equal to good. Homosexuality, along with high rates of divorce and illegitimacy, and all the ills that follow these, are all the results of such a broken society.
Click to expand...

By seeking to ban homosexual marriage, you're only treating a symptom that's already developed. Homosexuals are out there, and they love like everyone else. By seeking to stop them fro marrying, you're applying a band-aid to a amputation. You're doing nothing to stop this decay of society.
 
IMO it shows he's a very stupid and uneducated candidate who has a very limited ability to examine issues....very limited by his own bias/position.

Because of course gays have families. Always have, always will. Just because they are no longer hidden/less hidden doesn't mean they don't exist.

So he willfully ignores all the family law, adoptions, custody, benefits, legal protections, etc that have been and still are *family issues* pertaining to gay families as much as traditional ones.

He looks stupid and of limited capacity to capably deal with current issues in our society.
 
Bob Blaylock said:
Marriage is only between a man and a woman.
Click to expand...

Fortunately this "belief" is quickly dying out all over the entire world.

The good thing is, for men and women who are married - NOTHING CHANGES.

So enjoy your marriage, and let others enjoy theirs.

What other people do doesn't effect you at all.
 
No, it makes one anti-family, it makes them anti-love, and anti-children.
 
spud_meister said:
By seeking to ban homosexual marriage, you're only treating a symptom that's already developed. Homosexuals are out there, and they love like everyone else. By seeking to stop them fro marrying, you're applying a band-aid to a amputation. You're doing nothing to stop this decay of society.
Click to expand...

We certainly can never stop this decay, nor mitigate the damage that it unavoidably will cause, by treating evil as equal to good.
 
Your Star said:
No, it makes one anti-family, it makes them anti-love, and anti-children.
Click to expand...

How did you come up with that? There are lots of families without any gay people in them.
 
vasuderatorrent said:
How did you come up with that? There are lots of families without any gay people in them.
Click to expand...

So this candidate would not fairly represent gays and the children in their families if elected?
 
Lursa said:
So this candidate would not fairly represent gays and the children in their families if elected?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. I think he is seeking the majority vote.

I have a local politician who says that he doesn't represent any one party. He says that he represents all citizens of our county.

That's odd because he ran as a Republican. He isn't supposed to be representing Democrats because Democrats didn't vote for him. No. This candidate wouldn't represent gays and their children. That wouldn't make any sense if none of the gays voted for him.
 
vasuderatorrent said:
Absolutely not. I think he is seeking the majority vote.

I have a local politician who says that he doesn't represent any one party. He says that he represents all citizens of our county.

That's odd because he ran as a Republican. He isn't supposed to be representing Democrats because Democrats didn't vote for him. No. This candidate wouldn't represent gays and their children. That wouldn't make any sense if none of the gays voted for him.
Click to expand...

So that's helpful. Now you understand why so many women don't vote for Republicans! :)
 
Lursa said:
So that's helpful. Now you understand why so many women don't vote for Republicans! :)
Click to expand...

Yes. I don't know why the Republican are so determined to lose votes fighting a war that they lost 40 years ago.

Women love having those abortions. The Republican party needs to stop talking about it. The Republican party needs to lose and shut up. That's 20 years away. Those old people running the Republican party aren't ready to die yet and they insist on fighting a lost battle.
 
vasuderatorrent said:
Yes. I don't know why the Republican are so determined to lose votes fighting a war that they lost 40 years ago.

Women love having those abortions. The Republican party needs to stop talking about it. The Republican party needs to lose and shut up. That's 20 years away. Those old people running the Republican party aren't ready to die yet and they insist on fighting a lost battle.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the guys that aren't stuck with paying child support for 18 yrs for a kid they *also* didn't plan "love" them too.
 
vasuderatorrent said:
Absolutely not. I think he is seeking the majority vote.

I have a local politician who says that he doesn't represent any one party. He says that he represents all citizens of our county.

That's odd because he ran as a Republican. He isn't supposed to be representing Democrats because Democrats didn't vote for him. No. This candidate wouldn't represent gays and their children. That wouldn't make any sense if none of the gays voted for him.
Click to expand...

That's the way it goes though. If you win an election you do represent all citizens of the state/county/whatever, even those who can't vote (minors, prisoners, disabled) and take an oath to uphold the constitution, not the repub/dem party platform. They're all your responsibility.

And for a senator, the laws they pass impact the whole country, not just the state that elected them. One of the major flaws of the current legislative process.
 
chromium said:
That's the way it goes though. If you win an election you do represent all citizens of the state/county/whatever, even those who can't vote (minors, prisoners, disabled) and take an oath to uphold the constitution, not the repub/dem party platform. They're all your responsibility.

And for a senator, the laws they pass impact the whole country, not just the state that elected them. One of the major flaws of the current legislative process.
Click to expand...

I have a pony that lays golden eggs and a congressman that represents all citizens in my district, especially me.
 
Dragonfly said:
Fortunately this "belief" is quickly dying out all over the entire world.

The good thing is, for men and women who are married - NOTHING CHANGES.

So enjoy your marriage, and let others enjoy theirs.

What other people do doesn't effect you at all.
Click to expand...

unfortunately this type of common sense, civility and respect for rights and freedoms will go ignored. For some its easier to hate or oppress or self-servingly and hypocritically judge
 
AGENT J said:
unfortunately this type of common sense, civility and respect for rights and freedoms will go ignored. For some its easier to hate or oppress or self-servingly and hypocritically judge
Click to expand...

What's truly ironic is that the "don't tread on me" thing, along with "less government intrusion" and "more individual rights" thing goes completely hand-in-hand with SSM. Conservative ideologies and SSM are entwined.
 
Dragonfly said:
What's truly ironic is that the "don't tread on me" thing, along with "less government intrusion" and "more individual rights" thing goes completely hand-in-hand with SSM. Conservative ideologies and SSM are entwined.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%
while there are many conservatives that support equal rights I agree "stereotypically" equal rights and allowing SSM is a dont tread on me thing, it is a more individual rights thing (not the state denying rights) and a less government thing.

BUT in this case to "some" its magically different lol
 
A family is one man one woman and kids, anything else is something else.
 
lifeisshort said:
A family is one man one woman and kids, anything else is something else.
Click to expand...

So if it's just a mother and her kids that's NOT a family?

You know, like if her husband was killed in Afghanistan, or fighting a fire, or.....

:roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom