• 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 SSM a "dead" issue, now?

Is SSM a "dead" issue, now?


  • Total voters
    64
Well, one can hope.

It's been coming, anyone could see it was inevitable for several years now.

It's done... be nice if we could talk about something ELSE for a change.


However, I have an unpleasant suspicion that that floodgates will open for lawsuits based on this or that sort of discrimination claims, all aimed at ramming acceptance down everyone's throats. "Gracious in victory" seems unlikely. Movements don't stop moving just because they've won their primary objective; those who make a living leading the movement tend to look for the next thing to make a big deal out of, so they can stay employed. ;)


I hope I'm wrong. I doubt that I am.

A bunch of the people on this site got what they wanted and they still want to argue about it, this will never die down. The environment never got clean enough for the environmentalists, racism was never sufficiently eradicated for the so-called "civil rights" crowd, and there will never be enough tolerance for the so-called "gay rights" crowd to STFU. One thing for sure about the "progressive" crowd, they can't tell you where it will all end because they don't know themselves.

Just watch. This crowd will still be arguing about it for years.
 
It'll take another year, perhaps two, for the dust to settle. By "dust," I'm referring to attempts by various states to try work-arounds, such as only allowing religious clerks to officiate weddings and other such nonsense. Unfortunately I can't find the article anymore, but there's a bunch of tactics they'll be trying for a while.

Agreed. And it has been well-telegraphed that one of the early "Tactics" will be this absurd "war on religion / persecuted Christian" angle. At the expense of being Karnac, I think these silly challenges will be largely smashed by Appellate courts within 1-3 years, and we will live in an America where both gay spouses and Millennialist Christians will enjoy brunch in the same upscale suburban chain restaurants.
 
Generally the pattern in countries that have already legalized SSM is that the center-right parties declare that it is a settled issue and they won't fight it, and then when no politicians are fighting it, approval skyrockets to around 80%. The Tea Party might take some convincing, but I feel like that will be the pattern here as well. However, gay rights as a whole still has many goals to achieve, and we can't forget about LGBT rights because of this.
 
A bunch of the people on this site got what they wanted and they still want to argue about it, this will never die down.

And the people in these debates who didn't get what they want are, what, sharing apple pie recipes?
 
I hear you, Goshin. What I fear is that too many people don't really even want this to be a settled issue.



It's too good for making political hay of. I imagine there are some who are disappointed that it has been settled, not because they didn't support SSM but because it took away their political football to some degree.


So they'll look for a way to keep it in play and continue scoring political points off it. On both sides, no doubt.
 
Well, they're socially something... I'm not sure liberal is quite the correct term. Most of them seem to be as big on individual liberty as any libertarian; at the same time they're also in favor of substantial social programs for those struggling economically. One might say they are as much left-libertarian as liberal-progressive, depending on the issue. Yet in some ways they seem conservative on certain specific issues. They may be "something new under the sun" that doesn't really quite fit into any of the pigeonholes into which we've grown accustomed to stuffing people.

Like I said before it is called welfare-state liberalism. Classical liberal social values combined with a welfare state that creates equality of opportunity.
 
Not at all a dead issue. SSM is an integral part of the American outrage and shock at the Liberal devastation wreaked in the past ten years on the country that was America, along with open borders, unchecked immigration, foreign colonization, the rise of radical jihad, the Liberal destruction of the military, etc., etc. After last week, people look at the Supreme Court and wonder what happened to reason in America.

The coming homosexual gloating and endless "In your face" disgusting celebrations are going to fuel the rage and anger in this country far beyond what we've seen before.

I don't mean to be flippant but maybe people just need to build a bridge and get over it. The the reality of the situation is this will not be undone - ever. Seems to me that the healthier thing to do would be to accept that, and if you're personally opposed to SSM, don't personally participate in one. Continuing to tie oneself up in angry knots is only going to encourage continuation of what we've seen so far.
 
Well, they're socially something... I'm not sure liberal is quite the correct term. Most of them seem to be as big on individual liberty as any libertarian; at the same time they're also in favor of substantial social programs for those struggling economically. One might say they are as much left-libertarian as liberal-progressive, depending on the issue. Yet in some ways they seem conservative on certain specific issues. They may be "something new under the sun" that doesn't really quite fit into any of the pigeonholes into which we've grown accustomed to stuffing people.

They seem to be socially liberal because they are. Rightist Libertarians like to often forget that many Libertarians are economically Left leaning and not economically right leaning. Libertarians as a whole seem to think it's viewed as a rightist slant when younger generations definitely don't see it that way. Just look at what younger generations of socially liberal (or libertarian if you prefer) Americans align with:

Pro gay marriage in every poll in huge majorities

Pro marijuana legalization in huge majorities in every poll

Non Religious and or less religious

More friendly to Left economic policy and or social benefits (directly contradicting traditional Libertarian political thought)
 
Generally the pattern in countries that have already legalized SSM is that the center-right parties declare that it is a settled issue and they won't fight it, and then when no politicians are fighting it, approval skyrockets to around 80%. The Tea Party might take some convincing, but I feel like that will be the pattern here as well. However, gay rights as a whole still has many goals to achieve, and we can't forget about LGBT rights because of this.



Proof of concept.
 
It's too good for making political hay of. I imagine there are some who are disappointed that it has been settled, not because they didn't support SSM but because it took away their political football to some degree.


So they'll look for a way to keep it in play and continue scoring political points off it. On both sides, no doubt.

What you're saying makes sense. It will be interesting to see if it's one side or the other that more wants to keep perpetuating the argument or if it's about equal. That is something I truly don't know.
 
They seem to be socially liberal because they are. Rightist Libertarians like to often forget that many Libertarians are economically Left leaning and not economically right leaning. Libertarians as a whole seem to think it's viewed as a rightist slant when younger generations definitely don't see it that way. Just look at what younger generations of socially liberal (or libertarian if you prefer) Americans align with:

Pro gay marriage in every poll in huge majorities

Pro marijuana legalization in huge majorities in every poll

Non Religious and or less religious

More friendly to Left economic policy and or social benefits (directly contradicting traditional Libertarian political thought)


Not arguing the particulars that you noted; just that I'd be hesitant to pigeonhole them as "liberal" if that means assuming they are committed to the Democrat party and all its planks and positions... they seem far less attached to party identity or ideology to me, and more concerned with getting what they want regardless of the political label normally attached to the position.


Just my thoughts and observations, as a middle-aged man who has been studying the rising teens-and-twentysomethings for some while now... they're a very different breed than Boomers or X/Y'ers. Less ideological and more pragmatic.
 
Just because the issue is settled doesn't stop the religious asshats and hate-mongers from whining about it and threatening to ignore the law.
 
Your participation in this thread is a part of what's keeping it alive. We know you didn't pop by just to ask for gardening tips.

Proof of concept. I am sure you don't believe that you're keeping it alive by posting in this thread.
 
Proof of concept. I am sure you don't believe that you're keeping it alive by posting in this thread.

I'm not denying my participation in this discussion. You, apparently, would like for us to believe you're not here right now.
 
I'm not denying my participation in this discussion. You, apparently, would like for us to believe you're not here right now.

Well, whatever is going on, I am sure it must be the fault of a conservative somewhere.
 
Let's get on with the important stuff like banning flags and tearing down the Jefferson memorial.
 
I suppose the silver lining in the Constitution now being kindling is that it'll be easier to avoid hearing about this sort of crap.
 
Well, whatever is going on, I am sure it must be the fault of a conservative somewhere.

Is a liberal forcing you to participate in this thread at gunpoint?
 
Not arguing the particulars that you noted; just that I'd be hesitant to pigeonhole them as "liberal" if that means assuming they are committed to the Democrat party and all its planks and positions... they seem far less attached to party identity or ideology to me, and more concerned with getting what they want regardless of the political label normally attached to the position.


Just my thoughts and observations, as a middle-aged man who has been studying the rising teens-and-twentysomethings for some while now... they're a very different breed than Boomers or X/Y'ers. Less ideological and more pragmatic.


I agree they're less ideological but forgive me for pointing out that younger Americans being pro gay marriage, less religious, pro marijuana legalization and many of whom voted for Obama, forgive me for not calling those "Conservatives or Libertarians".

Sounds a lot like social liberals to me and not economic rightist libertarians.
 
I haven't read any of that thread but I could see where that could be a response to some of the anger expressed at the ruling.

Here's the thing: some people could think it's bad law. Some people could think everything the SCOTUS did last week was bad law, and you might even be one of them. it might not have a damn thing to do with SSM, but I am sure there are people who want to make it about that, just as opposing Obamacare is "racism" to some people.
 
I agree they're less ideological but forgive me for pointing out that younger Americans being pro gay marriage, less religious, pro marijuana legalization and many of whom voted for Obama, forgive me for not calling those "Conservatives or Libertarians".

Sounds a lot like social liberals to me and not economic rightist libertarians.


No, they're not economic rightists. They're not full on economic leftists either. They're pragmatic. They want the opportunities of capitalism, but if they run into trouble along their path to prosperity they want a good safety net to protect them from failure as well. Center-left, perhaps.

Socially, they seem like liberal/progressives on the surface, but in many instances they seem more libertarian-ish... more concerned with individual liberty (as opposed to identity politics). Many, for instance, are strong supporters of 2A rights, more commonly seen as a conservative or libertarian issue.

I suspect we're going to find them to be a rather unique voting demographic over the next couple decades as they come to power, who defy most of the conventional labels and ideologies in favor of a pragmatic pursuit of their preferred condition.
 
I think so. I think we now live in a world where SSM is no longer an issue and all arguments, pro and con, are now moot.

Seriously, that's actually difficult to wrap my mind around. All the time and energy arguing about who is and isn't pro/anti SSM and why they are and are not is moot. Like the ruling or not, the issue has been settled and it will never go back. Continuing to dwell on it and argue it, especially on the anti-SSM side is pointless. You're just making yourselves miserable over something that most likely will have zero impact on your life. On the pro side, you have every right to celebrate, but maybe you could try to be happy rather than hateful. C'mon, it's supposed easy to be magnanimous when you win (and you have won).

I, for one, look forward to all the furor settling down. Honestly, this issue felt a little like it tore me in two, understanding arguments on both sides and feeling that there are good hearted and sincere people on both sides, which was probably the most lonely position of all.

Anyway, do you agree with me that once all the victory laps have been run and all the anger has subsided (and it will with time - it always does), this is essentially a dead issue?

Now what are we gonna talk about?

Getting a simple poll together and sorry about the weird font (I hope it's not huge) - that happens sometimes when I save something to my iPad then copy/paste it later.

It is absolutely not over. There are many gay men and women who still suffer all over the world. Some countries still threaten death to any homosexuals caught openly. So no - the discussion must continue and those who still suffer under such tyranny must not be forgotten or swept under the rug.
 
Back
Top Bottom