• 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!

If you oppose same-sex marriage, you are...

If you oppose same-sex marriage, are you...

  • Total voters
    34
If you oppose blacks and whites getting married : you're a racist.

If you oppose rich people and poor people getting married : you're an elitist snob.

If you oppose Muslims marrying Christians : you're a bigot.

I wonder why we have no problem calling all these people for what they are but yet we're supposed to white wash the stance of bigots who oppose same sex marriage as 'a different opinion'? Give me a ****ing break. :roll:
 
Jerry said:
If there's an issue with a givin ruling, fine, but to toss out the entire branch of governement like that is irational.

I would no sooner dismiss the executive branch over a few executive orders, or dismiss the legislative branch for having codified Loving and Skinner since their ordering.
Click to expand...

There has been nothing rational or trustworthy about the United States Supreme Court. Get used to the idea that more and more people are realizing how screwed up our government is. :)
 
Hatuey said:
If you oppose blacks and whites getting married : you're a racist.

If you oppose rich people and poor people getting married : you're an elitist snob.

If you oppose Muslims marrying Christians : you're a bigot.

I wonder why we have no problem calling all these people for what they are but yet we're supposed to white wash the stance of bigots who oppose same sex marriage as 'a different opinion'? Give me a ****ing break. :roll:
Click to expand...

If you constantly assign slanderous names to people or groups with whom you disagree, you're a hyperpartizen hack best ignored.
 
Burning Giraffe said:
There has been nothing rational or trustworthy about the United States Supreme Court. Get used to the idea that more and more people are realizing how screwed up our government is. :)
Click to expand...

If that's true then why is pro-gm using Loving to get their way?
 
Hatuey said:
If you oppose blacks and whites getting married : you're a racist.
Click to expand...

Not really. I know plenty of people who would not agree with the mixing of the races, this does not make them racist.

Racism is the belief you are somehow better then someone else because of the race.

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

Hatuey said:
If you oppose rich people and poor people getting married : you're an elitist snob.
Click to expand...

Yea thats true, lol.

Hatuey said:
If you oppose Muslims marrying Christians : you're a bigot.
Click to expand...

Depends on who you talk to, pretty subjective in this case.

Hatuey said:
I wonder why we have no problem calling all these people for what they are but yet we're supposed to white wash the stance of bigots who oppose same sex marriage as 'a different opinion'? Give me a ****ing break. :roll:
Click to expand...

I am a bigot for following my religious doctrine? OK I can live with that.
 
Blackdog said:
Not at all, there is method to my madness.

It would make people think twice about getting married. The seriousness of the commitment mite actually take hold. People would not just get married on a whim.
Click to expand...

Oh man have you ever been through a nasty divorce? I've known plenty of people that have been and it ain't. That is in and of itself reason to not get married much less on a whim. My girlfriends cost over 30k and she still has to deal with a very self rightous man that can in his opinion do no worng. Heck the guy doesn't even pitch in on their child's private school education yet he is there at every function.
 
winston53660 said:
Oh man have you ever been through a nasty divorce? I've known plenty of people that have been and it ain't. That is in and of itself reason to not get married much less on a whim. My girlfriends cost over 30k and she still has to deal with a very self rightous man that can in his opinion do no worng. Heck the guy doesn't even pitch in on their child's private school education yet he is there at every function.
Click to expand...

Divorce is bitter. Either marriage should not exist, or divorce should not exist.
 
I voted unreasonable. Especially true if you're young. Opposing same sex marriage at this point is a futile effort no matter what your reasons.
 
winston53660 said:
Oh man have you ever been through a nasty divorce? I've known plenty of people that have been and it ain't. That is in and of itself reason to not get married much less on a whim. My girlfriends cost over 30k and she still has to deal with a very self rightous man that can in his opinion do no worng. Heck the guy doesn't even pitch in on their child's private school education yet he is there at every function.
Click to expand...

No I have not.

I am 46 and been married one time.
 
Not to derail the thread, but who knew Wanda Sykes was a Lesbian???

:confused:
 
talloulou said:
I voted unreasonable. Especially true if you're young. Opposing same sex marriage at this point is a futile effort no matter what your reasons.
Click to expand...

I think you mean "uncompromising", though that wasn't poll option.
 
Goobieman said:
Oh I see -- when they express their position against same-sex marriage, its different.

Doesnt this mean you need to revise your assessment regarding those that hold an anti-gay marriage position?
Click to expand...

You can spin this all you want. The fact is, if you are against same sex marriage then by definition, you want your personal views imposed upon others in a totalitarian fashion. If gays and lesbians were able to marry in your state, it would not affect you at all. Thus, its a personal bias on your part that you want to be continued to be codified into law.
 
Last edited:
SouthernDemocrat said:
You can spin this all you want. The fact is, if you are against same sex marriage then by definition, you want your personal views imposed upon others in a totalitarian fashion. If gays and lesbians were able to marry in your state, it would not affect you at all. Thus, its a personal bias on your part.
Click to expand...

That is it in a nutshell. Thank you.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
You can spin this all you want. The fact is, if you are against same sex marriage then by definition, you want your personal views imposed upon others in a totalitarian fashion. If gays and lesbians were able to marry in your state, it would not affect you at all. Thus, its a personal bias on your part that you want to be continued to be codified into law.
Click to expand...

You mean "democratic"....because nearly every state who have had the ability to vote on the issue has voted against it.

Let me save you a post or 2: yes, I want all of my views forced on thers against their will in a democratic fashion.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
You mean "democratic"....because nearly every state who have had the ability to vote on the issue has voted against it.

Let me save you a post or 2: yes, I want all of my views forced on thers against their will in a democratic fashion.
Click to expand...

What you are describing is a tyranny of the majority. Your rights in a free society primarily consist of negative rights. You do have some positive rights, however those positive rights only extend so far as to not impede another individual's rights and privileges.

For example, in a free society, the fundamental basis of that freedom is that individuals own themselves. Thus, even if the majority of citizens in that society voted to institute slavery, that principle of self ownership would prevent that tyranny of the majority from being codified into law. Now thats an extreme example, but the same principle applies to marriage. The majority opinion on the issue is largely irrelevant unless they can reasonably demonstrate how allowing gays and lesbians legal marriage recognition impacts the freedom of others.

Can you do so?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
For example, in a free society, the fundamental basis of that freedom is that individuals own themselves. Thus, even if the majority of citizens in that society voted to institute slavery, that principle of self ownership would prevent that tyranny of the majority from being codified into law.
Click to expand...
The 13th amendment prohibits slavery, not the principle of self-ownership.
 
Last edited:
Welfare to help dependent children was a 100% good idea until the Black family broke down as a result of that good idea.

Who woulda thunk it?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
What you are describing is a tyranny of the majority. Your rights in a free society primarily consist of negative rights. You do have some positive rights, however those positive rights only extend so far as to not impede another individual's rights and privileges.

For example, in a free society, the fundamental basis of that freedom is that individuals own themselves. Thus, even if the majority of citizens in that society voted to institute slavery, that principle of self ownership would prevent that tyranny of the majority from being codified into law. Now thats an extreme example, but the same principle applies to marriage. The majority opinion on the issue is largely irrelevant unless they can reasonably demonstrate how allowing gays and lesbians legal marriage recognition impacts the freedom of others.

Can you do so?
Click to expand...

No I can't and I don't claim to be able to either.

Gay marriage falls apart for other reasons. The law requires that gay marriage be a deeply rooted in the history and traditions of the people inorder to be a fundimental right.

It's not, therefore there is no mandate to allow it. Without this mandate neither I nor anyone else need to demonstrate how it would be harmfull and your entire argument falls asside.

Since there is no mandate to permit gay marriage, gays need to demonstrate how gay marriage would better sociaty.

Can you do so?
 
bhkad said:
Welfare to help dependent children was a 100% good idea until the Black family broke down as a result of that good idea.

Who woulda thunk it?
Click to expand...

So even when support was given in the name of helping children, the situation deteriorated because 'the family' was undermined in the process?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
The majority opinion on the issue is largely irrelevant unless they can reasonably demonstrate how allowing gays and lesbians legal marriage recognition impacts the freedom of others.
Can you do so?
Click to expand...
False premise - the majority need show no such thing.

In today's system, a law is passed by the majority; the minority oppressed by that law must then show that their rights have been violated. The majority does not need to show that the existence of gay same-sex marriage hams anyone.
 
Jerry said:
So even when support was given in the name of helping children, the situation deteriorated because 'the family' was undermined in the process?
Click to expand...

One stipulation for a family to recieve welfare was that able bodied men not be present in the household. But if racism helped keep able bodied Black men unemployed and unable to provide for their families the welfare stipulation made them leave the family.

So now all we have are young Black men wanting to be REAL men by following their role models.

Sex machines. Drug dealers. Pimps. Gangstas. Baby makers.

Thanks to welfare.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom